penalties that i mentioned. if the coverage is less than or costs less than 9 ft. 5% of income for the employee, the employee is -- less than 9.5% of income for the employee, the employee is required to purchase insurance for the employer. host: what are the two big issues as far as when people can purchase their insurance? guest: the open enrollment will begin october 1 of 2013. that is when people will be coble to go into the exchanges -- will be able to go into the exchanges. coverage will begin on january 1, 2014. host: they do so much, jennifer tolbert of kaiser family foundation. we will now go to the floor of the house of representatives. much, jenniferso

tolbert of kaiser family foundation it. >> a message from the senate. the secretary: the senate has passed section 3113, limitation of laboratory certification. the speaker pro tempore: thank you. pursuant to the order of the house of january 17, 2012, the chair will now recognize members from lists submitted by the majority and minority leaders for morning hour debate. the chair will alternate recognition between the parties with each party limited to one hour and each member other than the majority and minority leaders and the minority whip limited to five minutes each, but in no event shall debate continue beyond 11:50 a.m. this

morning. the chair now recognizes the gentleman from north carolina, mr. jones, for five minutes. mr. jones: mr. speaker, thank you very much. this afternoon a group of members from both parties are going to meet together to discuss possible legislative options to start the process of bringing our troops home from afghanistan in 2013. yesterday, i was on the floor speaking about army specialist joshua nelson from my home county who was killed by the very afghans he was sent to train. specialist nelson is just one of 60 -- 60 u.s. service members who have been killed this year by the afghans that they were sent to train. i don't know where the outrage is by the united states congress. i am very disappointed in both parties, their leadership to allow our young men and women to stay in a war that has no end to it, makes no sense to the american people. in fact, mr. speaker, the american people have said time

after time, poll after poll that they want to bring our troops home now, not 2014 but now. on october 7, there was a national article written and the title was "a mother mourns a grim milestone," referring to the 2,000 american casualties from the afghan war. lisa freeman, who was interviewed in the article, who lost her son, captain matthew freeman, in 2009, he was shot by a sniper in afghanistan, ms. freeman said, i just sat here reliving the pain and wondering , where is america's outrage? where is america's concern that we're still at war? and mr. speaker, i made reference to this yesterday. the october 14 "new york times" editorial, and the title, "time to pack up," the subtitle, "it should not take two more years for the united states to leave

afghanistan." it should not take two more years for the united states to leave afghanistan. since i strongly agree with that statement, i have started an online petition to start bringing our troops home in the summer or fall of 2013. the petition can be signed. it's jones.house.gov. and mr. speaker, i'm pleased to tell you in just three weeks, we have over 2,000 americans have signed this petition. our goal is to reach as many people as possible to put the pressure on our leadership to stop the loss of life and tragedy in afghanistan. congress, let's get together and work on legislation to bring our troops home before the current timeline of december of 2014. mr. speaker, before i close, this is one of the many posters that i have that i bring to the floor. it's a flag-draped coffin. there's a group of army officers. there's a woman holding the hand of a child, and you can see in the face of the child,

why is my daddy in that flag-draped coffin? congress, let's wake up, let's come together, let's start the process of bringing our troops home in 2013. please, god, continue to bless our men and women in uniform. please, god, continue to bless america, and i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. the chair recognizes the gentleman from oregon, mr. brauer, for five minutes. -- mr. blumenauer, for five minutes. mr. blumenauer: for years i've traveled the country preaching bike bipartisanship, using bicycle and pedestrian facilities to help people burn calories, not fossil fuels, improve their health, have fun and enrich the community. red state, blue state, republican, democrat, independent, it doesn't matter. the public gets it and has been part of an amazing renaissance. let's redouble our efforts creating a stronger federal partnership to help more communities realize this

vision. but let's not stop with bike partisanship. there are other areas that are low or no cost that enjoy broad public support, solve problems and bring people together, rather than divide them. what about rebuilding america? the t.n.i. committee was an island of congressional consensus. since we last passed the transportation re-authorization and the congress must act in about 97 wetion, let's work on a bolder -- weeks, let's work on a bolder vision of improving america, one that improves the environment, saves money in the long run. congress can begin on this now. in the aftermath of hurricane sandy, congress can't ignore the near bankrupt flood insurance program. while we fix the short-term problems, however, let's make it more effective, efficient and actuarially sound so that it will spare lives, property

and the federal treasury. overhauling the flood insurance program would solve the most immediate challenges caused by extreme weather events likely due to global warming. we may even be able to discuss climate change in a more thoughtful and rational way. based on work i've done in the past with congressman ryan and jeff flake, i know agriculture reform is a ripe opportunity. taxpayers cannot afford to lavish unnecessary subsidies on large agri business while harming the environment and shortchanging small farmers and ranchers. surely, tea party republicans and members of the progressive caucus can come together to improve nutrition, wildlife habitat, hunting and fishing while strengthening family farms. and since big bird dodged a bullet during the presidential campaign, maybe it's time to address the vital role that the federal support for public

broadcasting plays which we all rely on, not just for news and information, but education for our kids, and as illustrated by hurricane sandy, emergency communication. with incredibly broad public support from americans regardless of political party, congress should make a long-term financial commitment to funding the most trusted brand in broadcasting so it can plan for the future. the last 10 years have been characterized by bipartisan cooperation to promote access to safe drinking water and sanitation around the globe. my 2005 legislation, co-sponsored with henry hyde, bill frist, harry reid, saved lives and made friends for america. this congress we have another bipartisan bill, water for the world, which is co-sponsored with my friend, ted poe, which would build upon that foundation and accelerate progress.

it's all teed up and ready to go and could be easily passed next week. 86% of americans think getting full information about their situation as a loved one faces the end of life should be a top priority for health care. before the 2009 political lie of the year about death panels, this provision in the health care reform enjoyed broad bipartisan support. there's new legislation to personalize people's health care so that they get the information they need to make these difficult, sometimes painful, decisions and make sure their decisions, whatever they are, are respected by doctors and hospitals. this refine legislation could easily be achieved now that we're implementing health care reform. these are all bipartisan, cost-effective initiatives that are overwhelmingly embraced by

the public. is it perhaps time to have a legislators caucus where members of both parties who just want to get something done can come together with ideas like these? who knows. working together to get something done might become habit forming. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. the chair recognizes the gentleman from texas, mr. olson, for five minutes. mr. olson: mr. speaker, i want to share a plea from home from tony about the impending fiscal cliff. tony writes, we're going to have to go over the fiscal cliff and see the economy gumbel before the majority of the people -- crumble before the majority of the people realize how much trouble we are in.

i have end-stage renal failure and on medicare and receive disability each month. i do dialysis three times a week. that said, i will willingly and gladly take reduction in my benefits if it means we can reduce our deficit. i have two young nieces, and i'm looking out for their financial future. in fact, if i knew that taking away all of my benefits would get rid of our debt, i'd do that today. mr. president, hear tony's plea. don't take us over the fiscal cliff. tony and his nieces need you to lead. they need it now. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back.

the chair recognizes the gentleman from illinois, mr. gutierrez, for five minutes. mr. gutierrez: mr. speaker, i'm here today to make an introduction. i'd like the republican party to meet america's latinos. it's hard to meet us all at once. there are more than 53 million of us. but let me tell you a little bit about who we are and what we do. first of all, most latinos are citizens. in fact, most of us have been here for many generations. we live all over the united states and our population is growing fast. in fact, every single year 500,000 young latino citizens turn 18 and become eligible to vote. of latinos under the age of 18, 93% are already citizens of the united states of america. in this last election, 1-10 voters were latino. in another decade we will be 25% of the voting age

population in this great nation of ours. and here's a key fact about the more than 16 million latino immigrants. they work and they work hard often in jobs that are the hardest to fill, picking grapes and garlic, taking care of our children in daycare centers, digging ditches and making sure our dishes are washed. you know what else they do? they pay taxes regardless of their legal status. but here's one last fact you should know about latinos. they love america. and my republican friends, i promise in time, you'll love us too. i hope this introduction is helpful, but i know it's a little late. the republican party really mottola teen oast on election day. at -- really met latinos on election day. republican candidates opened their eyes to discover who really lives and votes in the u.s. it looked like we were watching columbus stumble across

america. latino voters, who knew? demographic changes moving slow as glaciers but this one seemed to sneak up on the news media like a sudden thunderstorm. i've been trying to introduce my colleagues to real latinos and immigrants for sometime. i've worked on bipartisan comprehensive immigration reform bills and stayed at the table to work out a compromise, even after all republicans had left the table, but the republican party seem much more interested in the imaginary latinos they tried to use as a wedge issue so they craft messages aimed at the very few americans who are not offended when immigrants are referred to as criminals, gang bangers, freeloaders, law breakers whenever they are spoken about in america. the party nominated a presidential candidate who has creative ways to defend latinos. call for the more than -- more than 10 million families and say just support them.

celebrate the extreme arizona laws, check. threatened to veto the dream act and let hundreds of thousands of young people who applied for deford action, fear for their future, check. stand with other republicans and beg for their endorsement when they have called for electrified fencing to keep out immigrants because, quote, that works on live stock. check, check, check. i believe election day was a checkmate for extreme, unfair and intolerant anti-immigration policy. now, we need to come together to make progress. in truth, some democrats did not seem to see this new electorate either or see the change coming. too many didn't see this as an issue or recognize the need for a change in the country that deports 1,000 people a day. we need to set aside the mistakes of both parties and do what is right for the american people, including latino immigrants. we need to invite democrats and republicans to sit at a big table to work out immigration

reform as soon as possible. i have suggested that president obama set up that big table at camp david and invite leaders from both parties to discuss how we forge the coalition to pass comprehensive immigration reform. i think after the election day wake-up call, there are more and more of us willing to come to that table and negotiate, including friends in the republican party. we have heard from republican leaders who want to be at that table. i know some republicans want to come to the table because they want the immigration issue off the table. they want it off the table because they are worried about democrats running the table in statewide and financial -- and national elections for the foreseeable future. but listen, whatever your reason for coming to the table, please come. together we can fight for justice for immigrants. together we can re-establish the rule of law. together we can make immigration one of the greatest and most defining aspects of american society instead of something that divides us.

together we can make americans see we can work together, republicans and democrats, as americans first. so please join us and do what's right for this great nation of ours. . the speaker pro tempore: the chair now recognizes gentleman from missouri, mr. akin, for five minutes. mr. akin: thank you, mr. speaker. in just about a week or so we are going to be sitting down at tables celebrating thanksgiving and eating turkey and getting a little sleepy maybe afterwards. but as we think about thanksgiving and we think about the holiday of thanksgiving day, it may be interesting and add a little richness to that holiday if we remember how it came about and what we have to be thankful for. there were allegedly a -- originally a group of people that came to this country in the mayflower and a number onboard had a dream of building a new kind of country. something that europe had never seen before. they believed that they would

take principles they found in the bible and that they would apply them in a new way and to create a new structure of how a country could look like. so they came to america and after landing within the first four months half of them had died. you think they would pretty much give up on a dream at that point. the mayflower had stayed to give them some protection and shelter, so it was in the early springtime that this group of -- the people that were left, about 55 of the pilgrims, had to make a decision. you could think of it as actually voting, only voting with their feet. they were approached by the captain of the mayflower and he said things aren't going so well. i have lost half my crew and half of you are dead. and we are going to be heading back to england. and i recommend that you get on the mayflower because you don't have adequate supplies and you don't have a knowledge of how

you're going to be able to deal with the wilderness that you are living in. so the mayflower's captain gave the command, the old sea weed covered anchor cable was hauled onboard, the yard arms were trimmed to the wind, and first large then small, the mayflower disappears over the horizon. the wind is blowing through the trees. and 55 courageous men, women, and children stood on the beach. why did they stay? they stayed because they believed in the dream that they had in their hearts of make agnew nation. and by staying they gave us some things that we should be thankful for. not just the thanksgiving turkey. first of all they came with the idea that civil government and church government were separate types of governments and the civil government shouldn't run the church or the other way around. and so they were what was called

in those days, separatists because they wanted to separate from the king of england who was running the church. so the first thing they did was the concept of separating civil and church governments. the second thing that happened was when they arrived in massachusetts, they were blown off course by the storms. so they had no government. so a group of free people under god wrote a document called the mayflower compact, starts in the name of god, and goes on to say just and equal laws. what happened was, a group of three people under god create add civil government. and that -- created a civil government. and that of course was the foundation of our declaration of independence and all of american civil government we can trace back to this courageous 55 people who stayed on the beach. as you are having your turkey think about how they gave us the idea of separating civil and church governments and also how it was that they gave us the idea that our creator gives us

life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. have a great thanksgiving. god bless you. the speaker pro tempore: the chair will now recognizes the gentleman from oregon, mr. defazio, for five minutes. mr. defazio: i thank the chair. the republican refrain is quite familiar. these tax increases will cause economic devastation. a recession, millions of lost jobs. today's fiscal cliff? no, actually that's the republicans in opposing the clinton era tax increases, 1993. opposed by every republican. did their predicted doom and gloom come true? well, kind of not. actually we balanced the budget, we paid down debt, and we had 3.% unemployment. while the millionaires and billionaires were paying a slightly higher rate of taxes. fast forward to today's debate.

restore the clinton era tax rates to millionaires and billionaires, republicans have dusted off the 1990's rhetoric. economic collapse, devastation, at least 700,000 jobs. the job creator, millionaires and billionaires, they are living on the enl. they have no discretionary income. any modest increase in taxes to them will stop them from making productive job creating investments. like the hundreds of millions of dollars they spent on super p.a.c.s in the last election to try and elect a president and congress that will bend to their will and lower their taxes even further while cutting middle income families' programs that are essential like social security, student financial aid. now, after their impassioned defense of tax breaks for millionaires and billionaires, the republicans do have a second priority, they are not a one note party. got to give them credit for that. that is to somehow kill social security. which they never supported. they think it makes people lazy.

well, you know, their millionaires and billionaires don't expect they'll need it, so they don't care. under the guise of deficit reduction the republicans are saying, well, we either have to privatize social security, increase the retirement age, or we got to reduce the already inadequate cola that seniors get. let's chain the c.p.i. we must cut entitlements. guess what? social security has never contributed one penny to the deficit or the debt of the united states of america. it is a program which pays for itself. so why this single-minded focus on cutting social security? yeah, it does have a protected problem of about 23% to pay full ben its starting in 2036. yeah, there's a long-term problem. that's easily fixed. all we have to do is close the tax loophole. maybe we agree there. here's the loophole i would like

to close. why does a millionaire may 1/10 the rate of taxes to social security of a cop on the beat? or soldier in the field? or teacher in the classroom? i don't know. that's what the law says. how about we lift the cap and have the millionaires and billionaires pay the same percent of their income to social security as cops and teachers and soldiers in the military? seems fair to me. there's a loophole we could close. and that would give social security assets adequate to pay 100% of benefits for at least 75 years into the future, as far as the actuaries will guarantee. so there's a loophole we can agree on, closing, hopefully. but they are going to have to give up on this lame argument that somehow making millionaires and billionaires pay taxes at the rate of the clinton era when we had record low unemployment will hurt our economy.

the speaker pro tempore: the chair will recognize the gentleman from michigan, mr. walberg, for five minutes. mr. walberg: thank you, mr. speaker. as the representative of a district that recorded more than $2 billion in exports last year, i know full well the significance of expanding market access for american companies and ensuring that our businesses are competing on a level playing field. that's why i believe it's important to support passage of h.r. 61-56, which will grant permanent normal trade relations to russia. this past august russia joined the world trade organization, giving its members full access to russia's rapidly growing market. reduce tariffs, and ensure transparency when implementing trade measures. however, while foreign competitors are currently benefiting, the u.s. will not receive any of these benefits

until congress authorizes the president to grant russia permanent normal trade relations. simply put, american companies, workers, and farmers are being put at a competitive disadvantage. last year my home state of michigan exported $225 million worth of goods to russia. despite many of its best products facing tough competition from foreign competitors. with this agreement in place, farmers and producers in my district will be assured of more predictable market access for the crops and arkansas urel goods, while manufacturers will enjoy reduced tariff rates for michigan-made vehicles and equipment. as the world trade organization member, russia has agreed to comply with the rule of law. though these reforms won't happen overnight, russia's accession to the world trade organization requires their compliance with all of the organization's rules and duties.

this includes addressing discriminatory practices, enforcing intellectual property rights, and increasing transparency. if it does not comply, members can enforce them through dispute mechanisms. of further importance, this legislation includes critical human rights provisions which holds foreign officials accountable for gross human rights abuses and prevents them from entering the u.s. or assessing our financial systems. house republicans have worked tirelessly during the 112th congress to advance pro-growth legislation which provides greater certainty for american companies and helps our nation's businesses hire more american workers. we made great gains in advancing trade interests for the u.s. and promoting new market opportunities for our companies. an ambitious trade agenda must continue for us to successfully lower the unemployment rate and restore our place as a global

economic leader. i'm glad we have the opportunity to pass another part of that plan today. if we are going to jump-start our economy and get americans back to work, we have to find ways to increase global market access for american companies and to advance economic freedom. i encourage my colleagues to support this legislation today. and i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. the chair will now recognizes the gentleman from california, for five minutes. mr. garamendi: i thank you, mr. speaker. i join my colleagues here in congress from both sides of the aisle to call for the end to the war in afghanistan. after more than a decade of war, with now more than ,000 lives lost, and hundreds of millions of american tax dollars spent, it's time for our troops to come home to their families. i represent the military communities of travis air force

base and come january i will represent the community of beale air force base as well. i can tell you from firsthand experience that the men and women who serve in our nation's military and their families are america's finest. they are not afraid of sacrifice . they joined the armed forces because they love our country and they are willing to give everything to keep our nation safe. but their sacrifice must be for a reason. if we are going to ask them to risk life and limb on the other side of the world, it must be for a mission that is vital to our nation's security. we can no longer say that about the mission in afghanistan. our brave soldiers are continuing to die in afghanistan for what is now a war of choice. we sent them to eliminate the terrorists responsible for the terrible 9/11 tragedy, and they did it. with remarkable courage and

competence. the al qaeda training camps have long been eliminated. most of al qaeda's top leaders have been killed or captured, osama bin laden is long dead. terrorism remains a global threat and we must combat it, but keeping tens of thousands of troops in a country the size of texas is no way to achieve this objective. rather we must continue to use our superb intelligence capabilities and our special operation forces to root out the terrorist networks and destroy their leadership wherever they may be. when we do bring our troops home, we must ensure that our returning heroes receive the support that is their due when they get back. we must make sure that they have access to housing, medical care, employment, educational opportunities that they deserve, and we must take care of all of our veterans. . the war in afghanistan has lasted 11 long years and it

must not last another. it's time to bring our troops home, and as we do so we must turn our attention to rebuilding america's economy. one way to do this is enhancing our green energy sector. the american wind energy industry is in jeopardy. the production tax credit will end december 31, 2012. it must be extended or else 30,000 jobs will be lost and 450 manufacturing businesses will close. two additional measures must also be considered. first, we could apply the master limited partnership and the real estate investment tax programs to the green energy sector and thereby bring significant financing opportunities along with the production tax credit. i yield back my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. the chair recognizes the gentlewoman from tennessee, mrs. black, for five minutes. mrs. black: thank you, mr.

speaker. while the president returned from the campaign trail last week with a slightly more conciliatory tone, his insistence on a year end tax hike on small businesses is unchanged, and frankly that is completely unacceptable. it is unacceptable for more than 23 million americans struggling for work right now. it's unacceptable for millions of middle-class americans struggling to support their families with rising gas prices and higher health insurance costs. and it's unacceptable because it will destroy jobs and hurt our economy. yesterday, the president said that his re-election victory is a mandate to help the middle class. he can start with helping the middle class by stopping his job-killing tax hike on small businesses. the president continues to call for an increase tax rates for the top two brackets which hit

more than one million small businesses and 53% of all small business income. that's a big problem, considering that small businesses create two out of every three jobs in america. according to the ernst & young report, the president's plan will result in the elimination of 700,000 jobs. the position of the congressional republicans on extending current income tax rates for all americans is far from extreme. it is actually the same exact position that president obama espoused two years ago when he agreed to extend all this year's tax rates for two years on the basis that raising tax rates would hurt our weak economy. that logic still stands. in fact our economy is even weaker today than it was in 2010. g.d.p. growth is lower than 2010 in large part due to the

looming costs of the president's health care law and his administration's dramatic increase in regulations. with more than 23 million americans struggling to find work, that is not the time to be raising taxes on anyone, period. we must also find common ground on the defense sequester to ensure that spending cuts are implemented but in a way that does not weaken our military or threaten our national security. both the tax and spending issues we face in lame duck are microcosm of our nation's massive fiscal and economic long-term challenges. entitlement reform and comprehensive pro-growth fax reform in the 113th congress are key to addressing our nation's greatest challenges. the policy outcome and the narrative that transspeier from this lame-duck session will set the stage for -- transpire from

this lame-duck session will set the stage for 2013 and beyond. we have a critical opportunity right now to avert the fiscal cliff and lay the groundwork for bipartisanship with policies that reflect our economic and our fiscal reality. thank you, mr. speaker, and i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman yields back. the chair recognizes the gentleman from virginia, mr. connolly, for five minutes. mr. connolly: thank you, mr. speaker. those of you watching on c-span just heard from my friend from tennessee, the unwillingness of the republican side of the aisle to recognize that elections have consequences. that in fact the president won re-election decisively. republicans made gains in the senate and gains here in the house. it's time to put aside the talking points. it's time to come together for this country.

mr. speaker, speaker boehner actually said it well. he said the mandate from the election of last week is for us to find a way to work together on solutions to the challenges we face as a nation. i can't agree more. elections have consequences and our ability to avert the fiscal cliff in which expiring tax cuts and across the board spending cuts are on the course to derail this economy requires us to respect that directive from voters. yet once again, lines are being drawn. you just heard it. over what types of revenue will be considered or what cuts are considered too steep. i hope was not the only one astounded by the comments of the c.e.o. of the american petroleum institute who recently said, quote, the oil and gas industry will not be singled out for punitive repeat, unquote. how fascinating. perhaps i could introduce him to the federal work force, our federal employees who are so far the only group to be

singled out for punitive treatment to the tune of $75 billion of deficit reduction. they understand the principle of shared sacrifice and have patiently been waiting for everybody else to actually share in it. mr. speaker, our chances for success and fending off the fiscal cliff become even slimmer if we start removing options from the table, as my friend from tennessee just did, before we've even sat down at that table. america voted for and deserves a divided government that actually works. the last time i checked, divided government doesn't mean it's going to be my way or the highway or your way or the highway or grover norquist way or the highway. divided government has and can succeed when leaders have done that thing which we have not been able to achieve very often in these last two years, compromise. that is the singular message

from our voters this year, compromise, work together to move our economy and our nation and families forward. i repeatedly heard that mantra from across my community, whether it's from seniors, teachers, small businesses or even my own neighbors. and now the nation's business leaders are starting to echo that call. in fact, ahead of the business roundtable, the former governor of michigan and our top c.e.o.'s are asking congress to do just that, compromise. in addition, the task force for american innovation, compriced of our top technology companies, are asking us to preserve education and r&d, which is the bedrock of innovation and competitiveness. and this week, even the u.s. chamber of commerce said it was opened to a compromise that included revenue. these are the constructive voices i hope my colleagues listen to as we approach negotiations on the fiscal cliff. politics is the art of

compromise, and working together we can reduce our nation's deficit and preserve strategic investments in those programs that fuel economic growth and competitiveness. even in the midst of the civil war, president lincoln and the 38th congress authorized the transcontinental railroad, the homestead act and the land grant college and university system. they understood we had to invest in the future while also dealing with the crisis of the present. no doubt we all have something to lose if we do not succeed. so perhaps by each of us giving a little we can revive this economic recovery, restore faith in our ability to govern responsible low and deliver on that mandate we just got last week from the voters. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. members are reminded to address their remarks to the chair and not to a viewing audience. the chair will now recognize the gentleman from missouri, mr. cleaver, for five minutes. mr. cleaver: thank you, mr.

speaker. mr. speaker, one of the reasons i rarely come to the floor to make such comments is that it is so troublesome to me that we will have fact-free debates and, mr. speaker, one of the problems is that we are talking in a parallel universe. there are small businesses who will pay more taxes but, mr. speaker, it's important that i say to you, this is not why i came to speak, but i think it is important that the top hedge fund managers last year earned $22 billion and then paid a 15% tax rate as a small business. and i'm troubled when we are

not being accurate and factual with the american public. mr. speaker, my concern today, as i believe the concern of many americans, is the situation we find -- in which we find ourselves. the american people elected a government wherein only cooperation can bring progress. we have a house of representatives that is predominantly republican, and we have a democratically controlled senate. it would not take a 3-year-old a great deal of time to figure out that the only way we can do the work of the american people is if we stop this ridiculous partisanship, this poisonous

partisanship that is damaging the country and creating a level of anger that there are state legislators in at least 13 states who introduced legislation for succession from the union based on the fact they didn't particularly like the president who was elected. and one of the reasons i think is that we are exporting hate, and if it's not hate it's certainly anger, and anger is just two letters short of danger. the american people gave us a mandate to do the simple things, and that is to lead. we understand that the challenge before congress in the coming weeks is no simple task. i would be wrong if i said that what we need to do is simple.

we have some major challenges. mr. speaker, the postal service is losing $25 million a week. $25 million a week. we're running around here acting as if the most important thing in the world is remaining faithful to our ideology. and ideology tragically has trumped logic in this place, and that cannot continue. we are right now facing once of billions of dollars in expiring tax cuts. it might be important, mr. speaker, for all of us to keep in mind that if we fail to deal with the sequestration issue, 90% of americans will see their taxes raised.

90% of the people in this country will have their taxes raised. but there is another problem. we have three major credit agencies -- credit rating agencies in this country -- actually for the world, essentially. standard & poor's, moody's and then fitch. we have been warned as a congress and as a nation that if we walk up to this again as we did last august -- two augusts ago -- that we will suffer another downgrading of our credit rating. the united states of america, the most powerful, technologically powerful and economically powerful nation on the planet will have a credit

downgrading. that should cause every american to be angry enough to put aside petty partisanship and understand that this body will not function and our government will not function unless we work together and we got to come to the conclusion that compromise does not equal capitulation. mr. speaker, thank you very much. i appreciate the opportunity. i yield back the balance of my time. . the speaker pro tempore: the chair now recognizes the gentlewoman from california, ms. lee, for five minutes. ms. lee: thank you very much, mr. speaker. as the founder of the congressional out-of-poverty caucus, i rise today to continue talking about the ongoing crises of poverty in our country. yesterday, unfortunately, with the supplemental poverty report, we learned that poverty continues to impact nearly 50 million americans, including 16

million children all across our country and in every congressional district. my home state of california tops the list followed by our nation's capital, the district of columbia, arizona, florida, and georgia. mr. speaker, i ask unanimous consent to add this report summary into the record. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. ms. lee: thank you, mr. speaker. this election day, low-income americans, the working poor, middle income americans, every american spoke loud and clear. they voted for strengthening the middle class and putting people back to work. and they voted for congress to get back to doing the work of the american people. to strengthen our economy for all americans. to create economic opportunities that will lift millions of families out of poverty and into the middle class. most importantly, the american people voted to reject job-killing cuts and the attacks to medicare, medicaid, and social security. what they don't want is for our

country to be rushed into urgent budget decisions by the false spread of so-called fiscal cliff. well, mr. speaker, i don't buy it. and the american people don't believe it, either. this economic and political gridlock is just another political cliff created by the hostage taking obstructionism of the tea party controlled congress. the real cliff is that anyone is facing today is a human cliff. that far too many american families are standing on the edge as i speak. if we don't strengthen our economy for all americans, millions will be cut off from the only lifeline keeping them from falling off that human cliff and into poverty. and that's unemployment compensation. far too many people will be cut off from vital programs like employment insurance, the child tax credit, and the earned income tax credit if this congress fails to act. so it is long past time to come together and to work to find a

balanced approach and to get, as chairman cleaver just said, the partisan obstructionism that has kept us from moving our economy and our country forward. we've got to stop this. just 10 years ago in the year 2,000 our nation had a balanced budget, projected surpluses, and a robust economy. the passage of the tax cut rapidly ended those surpluses and began to, quite frankly, explode the debt. the bush-era tax cuts have already cost over $2.2 trillion in federal revenue since they were enacted, and we could not afford to allow them to be made permanent. and let's not forget, mr. speaker, this congress has already voted to cut $1.5 trillion in discretionary spending enacted through the 2011 budget control act. low-income americans are already hurting from multiple rounds of cuts to programs and benefits that they rely on. our middle class and working

poor have already done their part and we cannot continue to attempt to balance the budget on the backs of the most vulnerable americans, our poor, seniors, our children, and disabled. i hope all members of congress will follow the president's lead and support his call for ending the bush tax cuts above $250,000, ending the billions in subsidies for big oil, and closing the countless loopholes that allow huge corporations and the superrich to avoid paying what they owe. in addition, we can find billions in additional saves by making smart and targeted cuts to our defense budgets. our military leaders have already outlined cuts that will not put our brave men and women in harm's way at risk or weaken the national security of our nation. yet we know that there are billions in waste, fraud, and abuse in the defense budget that can be saved if we can just account for the hundreds of billions in spending by ensuring the pentagon can pass an audit. mr. speaker, we face many challenges, but we must not allow our political crisis to create an economic crisis for millions of americans who are

struggling. now is not the time to turn our backs on struggling families just to preserve tax give aways to millionaires and billionaires. we must come together to wage a war on poverty and end the war on the poor. and finally a 350 economists have said, we need jobs first. with recovery, deficit reduction will come by its own accord thanks to increased revenues in an improving economy. they went on to say that public outrage for jobs and recovery comes first, budget cuts only lead to a deeper slump. thank you, i yield the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady's time has expired. pursuant to clause 12-a of rule 1, the house shall be in recess

one of the stories we are following across the c-span networks is the house and senate hearings on the attack on the u.s. consequence klatt -- consulate in benghazi libya. among those testifying today is the acting director of central intelligence, c.i.a. national intelligence director, and others. both the house and senate holding closed door hearings. we have cameras outside the hearing rooms in case any of the witnesses or members of the committee come to speak to the media. elsewhere, oklahoma republican tom coburn will be briefing reporters about proposed pentagon budget cuts. we'll have that live for you when it starts. it's scheduled to begin at 11:00 eastern. about 10 minutes from now we expect to take you there live. in the meantime, a look at items in the news and comments from c-span viewers from this morning's "washington journal." host: question for you this morning how confident department

are you in the white house national security team? our first caller is stan in new york on our democrats line. hi. chris: thank you for taking my call. i real will i appreciate all the things that c-span does. there's not enough people bringing issues like this to light. i'm the father of two young marines. so naturally things like this really get my attention to say the least. and it seems like as the information comes out about this more and more each day, that more and more questions and people have to stop and really look at this for the good of the nation. there's way too many things here that just don't meet the eye. i think yesterday the president got a free ride in questioning in front of this in front of the american people. now today it will go behind closed doors and they'll classify everything as top secret and we'll never know the truth. host: what would you like to see happen next? what would answer your

questions? caller: i don't know if it's possible to really do that in my mind because of the media. there's just not enough real reporting going on. i don't mean to be negative about this. with the media, but if you turn on the mainstream media, it's all about britney spears' underwear and what happened last week in hollywood. even this thing that's going on with the generals now. it's about the sex. it's not about how it actually affected the military and the decision that is were made. they are saying that general petraeus went to libya on a fact-finding mission himself a week before he resigned. it's kind of strange all these things. but there is one other thing i'd like to say and make c-span aware of. here in new york state we have a time-warner cable. they provide our cable service. and for ever it seems like, ever since we have had time-warner cable, we could always get c-span without having the cable

box. they have taken that option wavement now if we don't have the cable box to pay extra we can't get you. thank you for taking my call. host: along the signs of what stan mentioned in the news, here's the "baltimore sun," tribune washington bureau reporting. the scandal that forced david petraeus to resign has diverted attention from another problem for the c.i.a. why the agency failed to anticipate or repel the september 11 attack in benghazi, libya. house and senate committees are holding closed hearings this week to exam why security arrangements were so inadequate and why the obama administration offered to shift public response. here's what president obama had to say. this is his press conference in the white house. >> let me say specifically about susan rice, she has done exemplary work. she has represented the united states and our interest in the united nations with skill and

professionalism and toughness and grace. as i have said before, she made an appearance at the request of the white house in which she gave her best understanding of the intelligence that had been provided to her. senator mccain and senator graham and others want to go after somebody, they should go after me. and i'm happy to have that discussion with them. but for them to go after the u.n. ambassador who had nothing to do with benghazi and was simply making a presentation based on intelligence that she had received and besmirch her reputation is outrageous. host: president obama at a press conference. yesterday the ambassador he was

talking about is susan rice, ambassador to the u.n. here's an image of her in the "washington times." and a quote from her. the best information and best assessment we have today is that in fact this was not a preplanned, premeditated attack. those are words she said just after the attack in benghazi. our question for you this morning is about the white house national security team. here's what steve tweets in. i am more confident of this national security team than the one that told me there were w.m.d. in iraq. morris in san diego, california, joins us now. republican caller. hi. caller: good morning. i have no confidence whatsoever in this national security team. in fact i have less confidence in the president. i think this whole thing of benghazi leads right to the white house. right to the oval office. and president obama has made some statements already that are so contradictory of each other there is no way in the world he

could explain the contradiction of his comments. talk about a transparent administration. yeah, they are transparent all right of you can see right through them. and they are as corrupt as any i have seen. i think this is going to lead to impeachment. i don't think that's an overstatement. i think it will lead right to impeach. and i think he will be convicted of it. host: it's almost laughable to see is senator mccain comment about susan rice's qualifications after picking sara palin as his vice president in 2008. new jersey on our independent line. good morning. caller: i'm not happy with senator mccain. senator mccain lost the election. he's still trying to get even for the loss of the election. he's a great supporter of us -- our country attacking iran. how many soldiers and how many people in this country will get killed because of the disaster that would be if we got involved in iran? he should really be one of the

people doing the news on fox news because that's all they talk about all the time. they are constantly attacking this president. the president was re-elected. he is the president. and he didn't attack anybody in benghazi. if you turn on fox news, since it happened, every day benghazi, benghazi. i'm tired of it. let the president get on with what he's supposed to do. thank you. host: along the lines are you bringing up, "usa today" has this headline, obama gets tough on the g.o.p. he calls attacks on u.n. envoy susan rice outrageous, withhold judgment on the f.b.i. he also talked about issues like the fiscal cliff. here's the front page of the arizona republic. we get this courtesy of the new see yum. obama jumps back into the d.c. fray. patrick, rockville, maryland, democrats line, good morning. caller: good morning. what i have to say is projecting

weakness and disorganization as a whole to the public will not help this country. people need to basically try to fix the country, in my opinion. and if something like benghazi happened, we should be able to find out what happened privately and take steps to make sure it doesn't happen again. that's all i have to say. host: gale joins us now from wisconsin on our republican line. hi. caller: hi, there. how are you this morning? host: where are you in wisconsin? caller: milwaukee area. i just wanted to make a comment that i certainly don't have any confidence in the security team. the reason i don't have confidence is if you're going to go out in front of public and just be a puppet and say everything that you're told to say, not speak the truth to the people like this administration, then how can you have confidence

in people that are just going to repeat lies to you? the general, i can't wait to hear him speak on friday. i think it's behind closed doors. i can't remember. i think he's going to be the key to the whole thing. and the country needs better than what we have. host: it sounds like it will be behind closed doors of the the initial hearings that have been scheduled thus far. do you want to hear what he has to say? caller: sure. i'd like to hear what he has to says. i hope he speaks the truth and hopefully he stays alive long enough to do so. host: i'm not sure what you mean by that last part. caller: people have a way of sort of disappearing in this country when -- sorry. i guess i've been around too long and people seem to have the truth don't seem to have a chance to really speak it. and since he's way up there on top i'm just afraid for his

life, actually. that something might happen to him. host: let's go to independent caller. caller: good morning. i just wanted to say i'm 63 years old. i was a military man myself. i spent a lot of time doing some spying when i was in the navy and so on and so forth. i worked for an admiral. there hasn't been anybody since eisenhower that actually did a good job trying to protect this country -- what this country was really all about, and the progressives have taken all over this country. republican and democrat. it doesn't make a difference. progressive since eisenhower. and the -- what they've done is they've made this country the

laughing stock of the world and we tried to project how or and our actual strength has been diminished so much now that we're never going to get it back. so i think the safest thing would be to pull in our own horns and protect our borders and leave the other countries around the world alone. host: here's a tweet from jan. jan. m "usa today" --

>> watch all this in the video library at c-span.org. we'll take you to the senate radio gallery, senator tom coburn on budget cuts. >> we're putting out a report today called the department of everything. and there's a little problem in terms of the republican conference in terms of having a blind eye on spending. it's ok to cut spending anywhere except the defense department. and to be legitimate and having the integrity on the issue, everything has to be on the table. and so what we have done is we looked at the entire pentagon and this is just one section on it on areas where the pentagon works and has nothing to do with defense. and over 10 years, this is about $69 billion, and that's a very conservative estimate. at the end of world war ii, we had 12 million men under arms.

we had 2,000 flight officers and generals. today we have 1,000 flag officers and generals and 1.2 million under arms. it is totally out of whack. we almost have an at miller for every ship in the navy. not a captain but admiral. what we've done is look at areas where we cannot necessarily save all the money but we can transfer responsibilities out of the pentagon and consolidate programs and save a significant amount of money. i think most of you will -- the copy of the report has been released so you've been able to see it. we highlight as in every other agency a lot of the stupid things that are happening, but i just highlight one individual thing. on 16 or 17 bases in the united

states we have military-run schools. the average cost to educate a child in that school per year is $50,000. almost four times what the rest of public education costs. and the vast majority of our bases we use public schools. we could take the money we're spending today, pay every public school system $14,000 per child and save billions of dollars per year just on -- and with better outcomes. so here's one area where we could save billions of dollars for the american taxpayer by doing what we do in the rest of the military. we're not talking overseas. we are talking domesticcally the united states. if you factor in overseas it goes up a little bit higher. the point is there's lots of areas where we can in fact make big savings in the pentagon in

areas that don't have anything to do with defense and cut the pentagon's budget. and that has nothing to do with all the rest of the areas where we think we can save a ton of money in the pentagon in terms of procurements, modifications and just commonsense applications. let me take any questions you might have and we'll go over any areas where you might have concern. >> charlie clark. is there any clash between your ideas here and the desire to keep the volunteer army and make -- >> i don't think so at all. i don't think so at all. people don't join the army because there's a school on base. as a matter of fact, it's a minority of our bases that have a school on base. if in fact -- one of the things we have in here in terms of the grocery stores, you can give every family in the military $400 to $500 more for their groceries and save $8 billion, $9 billion a year for the pentagon.

and there would be no difference in terms of the benefits to the military. you know, what we have not done is look specifically at areas where we can save money. no, i go back. is our country in trouble economically? yes. our generals tell us the greatest threat to our nation is not any foreign power, it's not the middle east, it's not al qaeda. it's our debt. so everything has to be on the table. everybody area of the pentagon has to be on the table as well as every area of the government, and we can do things much more efficiently, much more effectively and probably better if we would take a new look at some of these areas. >> is this in any way considered to be an olive branch during fiscal cliff negotiations saying republicans are willing to put some defense spending on the table if democrats take something? >> first of all, we need to talk about what has happened and undermine a little bit of

the b.s. there has been no real cuts to the pentagon. there just hasn't been the hope or desire increase is in spending so therefore if we didn't get the increase in spending we will -- so that's where we are. now, it -- out of a $600 billion budget, imagine let the common sense and just smart thinking that we could save 5% to 7% to 8% of that and the answer is absolutely. the military base around the world or in my home state, there isn't an officer, general officer or private that i've talked to that doesn't agree you could cut 10% out of the areas of their responsibility. well, if that's the case, why are we not doing it? why are we not taking those ideas and getting them filtered? you know, i'd also remind you that we put forward before the break an audit the pentagon

bill, because one of the biggest problems in the pentagon is they have no idea where they're spending their money. if you can't account for it, you can't measure it, you can't manage it. so we need to do a lot of work in the pentagon. i have -- i am a budget hawk but i am also a military hawk. i want us to have the best equipment, the best equipped military in the world. and if you look at what's happening on procurement in our military, what you're seeing is we're getting a whole lot less and spending a whole lot more. in terms of capabilities. and that's all comes about in terms of our weapon systems development and contracting, which is broken. >> why do you think the g.o.p. has a blind eye to this kind of -- and what can you do to have the report have traction?

>> i'm having a press conference today to try oget you all to read it and look at it and say, one, is he right or is he way offbase? and i'll take any fair criticism of what we've done. i think we've been looking at this for a year and a half. we wanted to put this out a year ago and i wasn't pleased with it. i think all politicses have a blind eye to the area which they espouse. you know, we have a blind area on medicare in terms of waste, fraud and abuse in medicare. we have a blind area in terms of not incentivizing the proper things in terms of health care for the area of medicare. republicans have a blind eye when it comes to defense as a group. others have a blind eye when it comes to saving some of our entitlement programs by not changing them. i think that's normal, but i -- we're not in normal times. we are in be a mormal times. if we are to secure the future we need to start thinking differently about ohio we

approach the problems. -- but how we approach the problems. and what i think is everything ought to be on the table. >> the gang of eight had another meeting this week. we still haven't seen a work product out of it. the white house -- the president meeting with the leadership now. is it -- what happened to the gang of eight, and is it time basically to say this is going to be up to the president and the congressional leadership and the combang of eight is just not going to do -- gang of eight is just not going to do it? >> i don't make comments what we do and don't do in terms of our discussions in the gang of eight. but i would tell you that there's eight individuals, well meaning, wanting to give you a deal and show you how hard it is. and it's gotten harder after the election, as you can imagine. positions have been firm. but let's go back. the president won the election. he's the leader of our country.

it's time for him to say what he wants us to do specifically. both in terms of tax reform, tax changes and also entitlement reform and spending reform. you know, i remind you the size of the federal government is twice the size it was 11 years ago. i'm not sure we're getting twice the benefit. yes, sir. >> when you look through these different areas of spending, how much is it innesha and things build up over time and -- inertia and things build up over time and how much is it the responsibility of congress putting in certain rules or mandates to say let's look at x? >> i think that's a great question. let's divide it in two areas. number one, congress is a failure when it comes to oversight. i mean -- and beneath that

we're a failure when we write legislation because we give way too much authority and judgment to the bureaucracies, and the reason we do that is because we don't know what we're talking about so we have to because we're not up to speed on -- in terms of level of knowledge about what we should be about when we legislate. so i think that's the first thing. it is congress' responsibility to do the oversight. now, the second point of that is there is some inertia but that inertia comes from the lack of oversight. one of the things there ought to be moved out of the pentagon is all health research. i understand if you know the story, the history on that is ted stevens started that because they wanted a special project. and then ultimately before he left he was totally against special health research in the pentagon because he saw how it took funds away from the pentagon and diverted it other

than for the purpose. why should we be doing -- i'm all for the breast cancer research that we're doing, but why should we be running it in the pentagon? we have frances collins, one of the leading scientists in the world, running n.i.h. today who made major changes and major breakthroughs since she's been the head of n.i.h. we can't trust our best professional to do all of our health research? we have to do it in the pentagon? and then we have a layer of bureaucracy on top of it. i mean, you raise great points, but the fact is it doesn't get looked at. and so there is inertia. now we have a prostate program at the program whereas the health research at the program is things that affect troops directly in terms of battle, infectious diseases, posttraumatic stress, things that are impact the health of our troops directly as a

consequence of them being either deployed or a part of the program. >> senator, be-- part of the military. >> senator, besides audit legislation, do you have any other plans to try to make some of these recommendations a reality? for example, defense authority bill might be coming to the floor as soon as today. >> depends on if you can get any amendments. you know, last year they cut off the amendments about halfway through. we'll offer a ton of amendments. we probably won't be allowed to get them heard. again, it's the dysfunction of washington. not only do we not do oversight, we don't legislate properly on the floor. in terms of having a position to have a chance to change something that's obviously would benefit the country in the long run versus benefit the political process of moving a bill across the floor. >> what of these recommendations are you going to try again? >> i am not going to comment on it. that would be a negotiation because i'm sure we won't get every amendment we want. there are things i'd like to

see us do outside the military. this is just a small part. this is just $6.9 about the a year. just $6.9 billion a year. and not all of this would be savings because of it you would be transferring out. you probably have $4 billion a year in savings here. but that's $4 billion that you wouldn't take away from a procurement of aircraft or new rifles or new machine guns. remember, we have some of the oldest weaponry for our troops in the world in terms of their hand-to-hand weapons. we're behind the rest of the world in terms of it. so we'll spend a whole lot more on things that don't have anything to do with our fighting men than things that do. we'll prover several amendments and see if we can have an opportunity to vote on and explain to the members. again, i'd come back. is it not the responsibility of every member of the senate to be up to speed on where we spend the money in the pentagon?

or is that just the defense authorization committee and the defense approps committee and they're the only ones so you shouldn't know anything about it despite we're borrowing $50 million a second every day every second. you know, where does the responsibility lie? should we not be informed and knowledgeable of what is going on? should we not insist that the audit of the pentagon act not go through with the defense authorization bill? i mean, you can't solve a problem if you don't know what the problem is and if you can't audit the pentagon and they don't know where they're spending money, how do you ever fix it? you don't. yes, sir. >> senator, what do you hope for from this lame duck? is it possible that we get to bargain or is it more likely we'll put up some process for

next year? >> i don't know the answer. my hope is we could re-establish the confidence of the american people that the people in congress today are thinking about the long-term best interest of the country, not the short-term political interest of the individuals or their parties. regardless of who won the election. what's the best thing we can do? you know, in the long run we're going to fix all these problems because people are going to quit loaning up money. -- loaning us money. we are going to fix them. the question is, how much pain do we go through before we fix them, and how much strife do the american people have as a result of us delaying the solution to these problems? you know, as a young person today, if you have any knowledge about what's going on in washington, you got to be seriously concerned about your future. in terms of your economic future, in terms of your freedom. and when the young generation comes up to a bubble of

disappointment when the expectations that they thought were there and not there and they are not going to be there unless we actually do some things now, you're going to see some awfully disappointed people with some exaggerated behavior that's not going to be pretty. so it's not just about now. it's about what's coming. all you got to do is look at what's happening in southern europe right now. we are not all that far away from that, because there's going to come a time when the cost of borrowing will be so great that we won't be able to borrow and the -- forced austerity will be placed upon us. what i would say is we ought to be doing that now before that happens rather than when somebody else is telling us what we're going to do. all right. thank y'all very much. [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2012]

>> senator tom coburn on budget cuts, future pentagon budget cuts. the sfat is in session today. they have -- the senate is in session today. they have been working on a bill expanding hunting and fishing on federal lands. you can follow senate coverage on c-span2. the house will be gaveling back in at noon eastern on c-span and taking up the rule for a bill that would normalize u.s. trade relations with russia. again, live coverage here on c-span. there are several -- actually a couple of closed door hearings on the u.s. consulate attack on benghazi happening. house intelligence and senate intelligence later today. they're closed hearings. if there are -- we do have cameras outside the hearing room. if members come to speak, we hope to be able to bring those to you. and news today, also, that the senate intelligence committee announcing that david petraeus will testify tomorrow before a closed door hearing. that will be before the senate intelligence committee.

also reports today on the foreign relations committee, senator -- secretary of state hillary clinton will testify before that committee in an open hearing sometime in december. no date was announced. we'll keep you posted on that. while we wait for the house to gavel in at noon eastern, part of this morning's "washington journal" with retiring republican representative from texas, ron paul. host: what do you think can happen? what do you want to see happen? guest: well, there are lots of things i want to happen? i've been waiting for 30 years and i haven't seen anything happen. i have two weeks left to solve these problems. i don't think much will happen. the real solutions aren't even discussed. what they do in january,

they'll paper it over -- give some type of an agreement that they'll solve the problems later and appease a few people and i don't think a major calamity is going to happen, you know, in january. it will be temporary. what we hear and when we hear the news about the problems in greecehow many solutions have they had? the have probably had 15 solutions. every time they come up with a solution, the markets respond favorably. the whole problem whether it is greece or the united states is we are broke. most countries in the world are not solvent except maybe in the far east. china and some other places. they have money in the bank. there are not facing up to the fact admitting we are broke. if you or i are broke, we have to cut spending back or work

harder or declare bankruptcy. but a country does not do that as long as the credit is good. because of our past performance, because there is still wealth in this country and we have a strong military, it is perceived that we will work our way out of it so our credit remains good. that really discourages politicians from feeling the pressure to do something. they're not talking about any cuts. neither side wants a significant real cut of anything. and so it's impossible. i think we are at the point where we have passed the opportunity to actually work our way out of this. the inevitable will be delayed and it will take a while for people to realize we have to change what we are doing in our government. change the role of our government. i think that is what the people have to realize. host: if you would like to speak to congressman ron paul, republican of texas, here are the numbers to dial. democrats, it's 202-737-0001.

republicans, 202-737-0002. and independent caller, 202-628-0205. -- 202-385-2882. let's take a look at one of the issues at stake, the tax increases that could happen if congress does not take action. we have a graphic on the screen to show our viewers. if you make in the $20,000 range or lower year tax increase will be $400. if you make $20,000 to $40,000, you have a $1,200 increase. it goes up from there. if you make between $64-$108,000, you could see a boost in your taxes of $3,500. if you make more than that, looking at $15,000 tax increase for the higher wage earners in the $108,000 income bracket and beyond. congressman paul, do you think this will happen? you just talked about sort of

what the 113th congress may do in the coming year, but what about some of the short-term stuff? guest: i think there will be every effort to not raise the taxes on the low-income and middle-income individuals. but it just represents the fact that they don't have a solution, because they gave these temporary cuts, you know, on the withholding tax and all. they are kidding themselves. i think they will probably change that a little bit. they still will face a major problem. this is a reason i think the markets are so weak since the election. not only are they facing this crisis, but the tax -- the taxes are going to go up. the president is pretty blunt about this but he said, oh, we'll only raise it on the rich. the rich are the ones who sometimes start a business and other things. you point out correctly that some of the taxes will go up unless they change things on the middle-class and the poor.

it will be devastating to the economy. there is no easy solution because nobody wants to consider that we have to cut spending, we have to change our foreign policy and we have to reassess the whole entitlement system and they are not in the mood to do that because there are too many politically that say, you can't touch my program. touch somebody else's. that is the reason we are going to continue to do this and things will get worse until the crisis gets so bad we have a currency crisis, interest rates go up, we will have to revamp. that will not happen in january. it's all going to -- they are going to pass the buck. host: let's go to the phones and see what the viewers have to say. barb is from our democrats line. good morning. caller: i think all of the bush tax cuts should be eliminated and those dollars be applied to the deficit. for the areas under

sequestering, i think they should eliminate the requirement that everything to be cut across the board and let the defense department to determine what they need and what they do not need. the same with the discretionary areas. guest: i agree with half of what you say. i think the military is a big problem. both sides really did not want to touch because they believe we should be involved with all of the countries around the world, we should be involved in all of these wars. i said, no. breng the troops home. stop fighting these wars. our national debt through the bush and obama administrations, our debt went up over $4 trillion just because of these wars that are totally senseless. the loss of life. now they are talking about when

are we going to go in? we are involved in libya. look at what is happening with libya. iraq is a mess. it want to go to war against iran. they are trying to get us involved in syria. i would say, that is the place to have big cuts. we all ought to agree on doing that. i would not raise taxes. that isn't the problem. we need to cut the spending. if you raise taxes, you're going to have a weaker economy. some of the tax cuts, even for the middle class occurred with the bush administration. you do not want to raise taxes on the middle class. say, no, just do it on the rich. it will not be enough money. i think you have touched on something. i think we need to deal with the military. we can't do that unless we change our foreign policy and not assume the role as the world policeman and getting involved in all these countries. i would think the american people ought to agree on that issue

more readily than anything else. i do not see why we should talk about cutting health care for children or for the elderly and social security -- i do not think that is where you start. i think we have to start by changing our foreign policy. host: as republicans come to the negotiating table in the next couple of weeks, what do you think your party will be moving to move on? guest: my guess is they will agree on some tax increases and it will call it tax reform. it will probably agree to some of these so-called spending cuts. even the spending cuts with sequestration, they are not cuts. there are token little cuts on proposed increases. the automatic increases with baseline budgeting. this is what is so deceptive is that cuts are not cuts. cuts are just backing off a little bit on automatic increases. so they are going to agree

probably to raise the taxes and pretend they are cutting by taxing and by not increasing the spending quite as rapidly. it will not solve the problem. that is what i think will happen. host: natalie, next caller, republican from virginia beach. caller: thank you for your service. i look forward to hearing about what you do after your career. i, myself, and my husband are both serving in the military. both of us can't help but be disturbed by what is happening with benghazi and things going on with generals petraeus and allen. i just wanted to ask you, i do not want to say there is a cover-up happening or what not, but i cannot help but see that there is some kind of correlation between all of these high wig generals or

armed forces -- the fact that something is happening with them and the whole situation with benghazi. i just want to know from your standpoint, how you feel about the correlation between the two. guest: there are a lot of things you have to sort out there. first, the wars that have been going on and whether the responsibility of the cia. then you have the sex scandal. then you have the cover-up. i think the sex scandal -- the cover-up is natural. that's what politicians do. they always have investigations, but that is a blame game. i think they are missing the whole thing. they are talking about the sex and they are talking about the cover-up, but i'm more interested in talking about, you know, our responsibilities. we have general petraeus that are running these wars that are a total disaster and all he gets is high praise for his military skills. so he gets put over in the c.i.a. and he doesn't even realize about, you know, the

ability to look at emails. and he's supposed to protect us? look at the protection the c.i.a. gave to the people in benghazi. and this is a reflection of the foreign policy. why do we support these rebels? we put them in charge, and then they turn on us. that is exactly what's happening in afghanistan now. we're training these afghanis to be able to take care of themselves. after they get trained on how to shoot these guns, they turn and they shoot the trainees, the trainers. that policy makes no sense whatsoever. how this pans out remains to be seen. i think we have to deal with the policy itself. not only would that save money, but other countries realize there is a big problem in libya. we should have never been involved in libya. congress didn't vote on that. the president went in and supported the rebels, the

authority was coming from nato. that's where the basic problem is. the bad guys come in and turn on us. one thing they should ask is, what is the reason they do this? what is the motive? anything from 9/11 on, any murder that has ever occurred, any killing that occurs, they have to have a motive. when people get killed like benghazi, what is going on? that is what we should be looking at. unfortunately right now we have a real mess and a scandal. i think it should be expected mainly because when we get involved in internal affairs of other nations, when we get involved in wars we should not be involved in, believe me, we will have chaos and it will continue until we change our attitude. we wouldn't be involved in so many of these countries if we followed the constitution. host: alex writes in on our

facebook page which our viewers can find if you look for c-span and has a question for you, congressman paul. what do you think others should do to advance the cause of liberty? guest: well, they have a personal responsibility and they need to understand that. government reflects the people. if the people assume responsibility for themselves there would be less for the government to do. what we need to do is to restrain the government. and that's what the constitution does. the constitution has no restraints on the people. the restraints are placed on the government, but we don't follow that. so i think it's not trying to get people to realize that self-reliance is better than depending on the government that can only transfer wealth from one group to another and undermine the system. yes, for a while they can get away with it but eventually they'll destroy the currency, they destroy the production in a free market economy, and they have to argue for free market economics and argue for

property rights. they have to argue for sound money. they have to argue the case against central banking and they have to argue the case that self-determination is important. and that means the smaller the units of government the better. so we were all very pleased of the breaking up of the soviet union. that was healthy. they have to follow through wherever they are and to have a market economy. the more freedom a country has, the more prosperous it will be. governments can't create prosperity, and i think it's that format of the type of government we should have would solve so many of our problems. host: eric is on our independent line joining congressman ron paul. go ahead, eric. caller: hi, i'd like to say first that congressman, i consider you a hero.

i would like your opinion about what is going on right now with israel and palestine. to gaza. i think they are acting upon hamas in order to put their blame -- against iran and see what your opinions would be. guest: that has been a mess for a long time and i believe we should be noninterventionists. we should not pick sides. i think it would be best for israel and best for that whole region, so i don't believe in getting involved. it is a real mess. it's been created by too much and too many outsiders interfering. but this gaza thing, i mean, attacking and bombing gaza, that doesn't make a whole lot of sense. what threat are the palestinians? to israel or anybody else? they are living in total poverty. they have an employment rate probably about 50%. sure, there are going to be militants.

you have to understand why they're militants. you know, what is the reasons? they have been held more or less in bondage for decades now. it's a real mess. i think we should not be involved. i think the people there should solve the problems and eventually israel won't be able to depend upon the united states. this whole idea that israel wants us or they're getting ready to bomb a country that might have a bomb someday, i mean, it makes no sense to do that. yet, that's what they're anxious for us to do. what happens when we go broke and what happens when it's acknowledged and we can't even afford to feed ourselves? we are not going to have a military. the military will come home just like the military came home when the soviet union collapsed. we are not going to be there to

take care of israel. i think it's a mistake. at that time then, all the people we have offended around the world, whether it's the palestinians, they are going to gang up on us and it will not be good for israel because we will not be capable of providing protection. host: this is the front page of "the pittsburgh post-gazette." israel launches an assault on gaza. let's go to our next caller. ron joins us from westchesterfield, new hampshire . caller: good morning. i am honored to speak with you this morning. libby, you look beautiful as always. thank you, c-span. i have two quick comments. one about the benghazi killings and one about the taxes. i'll start with again ghazi here just real -- benghazi here just real quick. it seems the republicans are looking for any reason to besmirch this administration.

maybe if the republican congress hadn't cut funding for security for our embass sees by $30 million in the last two years, you know, maybe our people would still be alive over there today. i think they're looking for someone to blame for that. maybe they should look in the mirror. and as far as the fiscal cliff, there again i think the republican congress brought a lot of this on us as well. suddenly not working with this president. you know, it's pure, plain and simple. along with the corruption that there has been, political corruption and corporate corruption and almost brought our economy to its knees. it was less than a year ago i think they did away with insider trading for our politicians. i mean, come on. nobody in the real world is able to get inside information

on what stocks are going to go up and what stocks are going to go down, why politicses have that ability is just corruption. lots and lots of corruption, and that's one thing that really needs to be cleared up before we're going to be able to clear much of anything else up. host: let's get a response from the congressman. guest: i am more bipartisan than you are. i think you're right in blaming the republicans for a lot of these problems, but democrats are exempt. i see us living with a one-party system. you know, which candidate in this last election was the goldman sachs candidate? they both get money from wall street. they both support the same foreign policy. i think the problem we have with benghazi is we should have recognized first is we shouldn't have supported the rebels and then get involved. then we ignored all the warnings. and whether we cut a couple dollars back, we never cut anything. we might have cut some

increases. that is all. but we should have recognized the danger. we should have had those people out of there. other countries knew it was dangerous. and for us to have stayed there is foolish, but to blame republicans or to blame the democrats back and forth, i don't think that's as accurate as saying whether it's the federal reserve policy, whether it's suspending policy or whether it's the welfare system, whether it's the foreign system, it's very, very bipartisan. see, we've had too much bipartisanship and compromising in washington because they support the same issues. the only thing they don't support is people who get to pass out the money, and they do fight over the power and the influence, but policies never change. i think the rhetoric is difference. i think obama, as a matter of fact, had a more sensible foreign policy approach in this last election. he sounds like he wouldn't be quite -- romney wanted to increase the military budget by

$2 trillion. obama sounded like he would be less likely to start a war with iran. but the truth is the policies are exactly the same. so i would be very bipartisan in blaming both sides for this and also the fiscal cliff is the same problem. there's not one side that spends more side than the other. look at what the conservatives do when the republican are in charge and look at what the liberals do when they're in charge. the spending continues. the deficit keeps going up, the federal reserve keeps bailing out the rich. the welfare, you know, the democrats are seen as defending the welfare for the poor and the republicans defend the rich. the whole thing is they both defend welfare for the rich, number one. the military industrial complex, the banking system and the bailouts, they bail out the very wealthy and bankers in this crisis in the last five years, but people lost jobs and they lost their houses.

that is very bipartisan. if we stick on the idea if we can blame the democrats or the republicans for the problems, we are not going to solve the major crises we are involved in. host: congressman paul, alex writes on twitter and asks, do you think the libry tarians will take the place as the republicans as one of the major parties? guest: no, i don't. republicans and democrats are in charge. they're one party and they have control of the system. we send kids, young people over to afghanistan and iraq and we're going to teach them how to be good democrats, have democratic elections. we don't have real freedom here. if i had not run as a republican -- let's say i ran as a libry tarian, i wouldn't have been in the debates. i wouldn't have been able to get coverage. you can't get on the ballots because of the system. so it's very, very biased.

i think it's very important that whether it's the green party or libry tarian party that they do -- lib retarian party and they do their best how they come up short in how the system works, but under the rules today, it's virtually impossible to compete and become a major party. the only way we can do it is if you have correct ideas. you should infiltrate the republican and democratic party. for example, keynesian economics, nixon said we are all keynesian which means the republican and democratic parties believe in keynesian economics. those ideas have to infiltrate the democratic party as well as the republican party. but today to expect the libritarian party to become a major party, unless there's a

miracle, that will not happen. occurs where all of a sudden they allow us to be competitive in third parties. the only alternative we have now is try to change people's minds and understanding of economics and try to infiltrate the system, you know, so we can influence both parties. host: let's hear from our next caller. john is in deerfield beach, florida, on our republicans line. hi, john. caller: hi. good morning, guest: good morning. caller: two questions. one would be if the benghazi situation was a real demonstration, we saw no signs of "death to america, death to israel," which seems really change. why doesn't anybody ask -- and one question about the fiscal cliff. why does no one ever say, raise the payroll tax cut to say $1

million or $250,000? guest: they are good questions. obviously i do not have those answers, especially in benghazi on why people haven't said this or done this. i just resort to the fact that we set ourselves up for these problems mainly because we shouldn't be involved in doing these things. but you're right. the investigation should look into that. who made the rules and who made these decisions? solving these problems is like raising more taxes and moving up the ladder and put more taxes. spending is the tax. the tax is all secondary. it's the spending. so as soon as the spending occurs, they're either going to have the -- have to tax us which people know and understand or they will borrow the money, which is a tax. or you print the money and you

have financial bubbles and crashes. spending is the problem. this whole idea you can come up with a solution, a lot of conservatives like the fair tax. well, my fair tax is no tax, no income tax, but no spending. but as long as you want the government to take care of everybody and have the government manage our lives and manage our economy and have the safety net for the rich as well as pretending to take care of the poor, as long as you believe you can police the world, none of these problems can be solved. you have to cut spending. you can't cut spending unless you have restraint on the government, and it isn't like i'm inventing this and i want you to do something new and strange. all we have to do is have people in washington take the oath of office seriously. look at article 1, section 8. that's the only they are thipping we're allowed to do and if it's not prohibited by the constitution, you mean, everybody goes back to the states and to the people, the

amendment 10, the 10th amendment, that would solve the problem. but nobody's interested in that. they're interested, how am i going to do this, who am i going to stick, who is going to be the victim, how are we going to sink the rich? all these things that are pretending to soak the rich. they will go offshore. who suffers? the people that lose their jobs. right now we have 47 million people on food stamps. we still have 20,000-some people unemployed and the government telling us we're coming out of the recession. those are the kinds of things you have to deal with and you can't deal with by more of the same. more debt, more bore ogse and more printing of money. believe me, that's all we're doing and we're just driving ourselves into a deeper hole. host: congressman ron paul represents texas' 12th district which is victoria, freeport, he's retiring at the end of had

112th congress. of course he ran for president this past year as part of the campaign 2012 in the republican field. he was also the libertarian candidate back in 1988. he was a u.s. flight surgeon. a u.s. house member for a couple of different time periods. he was the republican nominee for u.s. house back as early as 1974, before you entered office in 1979. well, we dug in the c-span archives to find footage of you, c-span video library talking about issues you're still passionate about until this day. this is from april 20, 1983. let's take a look at congressman ron paul. guest: there will be statements about the need to tighten security in order to protect u.s. diplomatic personnel. no one has suggested an obvious alternative for protecting our foreign serviceperson ell stationed abroad. we should withdraw our diplomatic personnel from

volatile areas of the world. i'm not suggesting the breaking of diplomatic relations with these foreign governments. if the closing of our embassies is impossible, we should greatly reduce the scope of their functions. this era of rapid transportation and instantaneous communications, the world of our embassies and ambassadors serving abroad has drastically changed. when communication was slow, the u.s. ambassador made policy decisions without consultation with washington. nowadays, the decisionmaking process is centralized in washington. ambassadors and embassy personnel carry out policy decisions that are made at foggy bottom. modern technology has reduced the need for -- we must end the practice of stationing intelligence agencies at our embassies. this practice helped to precipitate the hostage crisis in iran and possibly even in lebanon. these intelligent agents have

no diplomatic function whatsoever. host: that is our guest back in 1983. we found that in the c-span video library. congressman paul. guest: i am amazed. i remember that period of time very well. i do not remember that particular speech. but it seems like more things change the more they stay the same. i mean, some of what i was talking about could apply particularly in libya right now. i think i said this earlier. why stay there? why get involved? once again, it isn't something i thought this up. it's sort of looking at our history and the advice. most people honor the founders as being pretty smart individuals. they say be friends with all nations and have trade with people and be more tolerant of their problems. we can't go in and solve them.

we would have a better worldwide situation and have more prosperity and more peace. i think it is a great idea. i think if we'd taken that advice from the founders we would have less problems certainly throughout the 20th century. just look at the 20th century, the hundreds of millions of people that died in all the wars that went on. in the 21st century it looks like we've accepted the notion that we are going to have perpetual war. global war on terrorism. we have a drone warfare. we declare that whoever is running it, the c.i.a. or the military, that we can drop a bomb. we have kill lists that americans have been put on and we have drone warfare and we can attack anybody, anyplace, anytime. this is tragic. the american people have to wake up. it isn't the government is going to wake up. the government is going to do what they're going to do. the american people need to wake up and say enough is enough. that's going to happen when they can no longer pay the

bill. when checks bounce, when social security doesn't work and when people are suffering, our troops come home, then we bet better sit down and say maybe a good tarting point is maybe we should look at our constitution. host: let's hear from johnson city, tennessee. hi, devin. caller: good morning. thank you for serving this country. where do you think this country will be in about 10 years? do you plan on running in 2016? if you do, will you run with jesse ventura? guest: i don't have any plans in 2016. you want to know where i think the country will be in 10 years, as a matter of fact, i'm pretty optimistic that things might be a lot better, but the problem is we have to go through the wringer first. where i'm very encouraged, you know, i deal with ideas and changing people's attitudes about the role of government and self-reliance and responsibility.

but where i have been encouraged, whether the 2008 campaign or the 2012 campaign, that the reception kept growing and growing on the universities. in all true -- and all true philosophic have to start with the young people. the receptions have been fantastic. and they're interested in free markets. they're interested in this. the young people graduating from college are aware. what do they have? personal debt that they can't pay. the jobs that they're getting aren't worth all that much, and they know there's a problem so they like -- they're enjoying this idea that there is a solution. and this is what it's important, if we change the attitude of a whole generation, in 10 years from now, they may do the rebuilding. and i think we are going to survive it. our traditions are great. our traditions are much greater than wh the soviet union collapsing and going back in the old traditions of russia. so we're better off, but this

is a worldwide phenomenon and i think a lot of other countries are looking at this, so i'm keeping my fingers crossed and working through the day and i'll do this outside of politics as i leave congress. there is every reason to be optimistic in the long run. but not to be naive and think, oh, let's just get a few more negotiations over here and we're going to negotiate and we're going to solve our problem of the fiscal crisis because we're going to trade. that is not going to work. host: marcus on twitter also asks about your future plans and wants to know if you'll work to reform election law to make ballots available for third parties? guest: i have always done that and will always work to try to reform it. you know what would be a real help is if it were legal to put your name on the ballot. obviously people know i have libertarian beliefs, but if i

could run on two-party labels, republicans and libertarians and add them up together, this would give more credibility to the third parties. in new york you could run as a republican and as a conservative. i think we should have more of that. it's going to take a lot more than that because it's going to take changing the laws. like i said earlier, republicans and democrats control state legislatures. they make it very, very difficult to get on ballots. and getting all these signatures, it is easier to get on ballots in some countries in the middle east that we think are chaotic than it is in this country. host: let's hear from kay in san diego on our democratics line. good morning, kay. caller: good morning. i am honored to talk with you. i admire all these years you walked to the beat of your own drummer and i wanted to let you

know that my grandson nathan, who's 15, was inspired by you to get interested in politics. so he's really coming along and learning a lot. my question is, i hear you speak sometimes even though i study politics and i'm really interested in it, i've never been able to understand the federal reserve bank and how it works. and i was wondering if you could explain to me the basic workings of it and why it can be -- guest: well, the central bank is a money supply. they interfere in the marketplace. this argument has gone for a long time. jefferson and hamilton argued about this. hamilton wanted a central bank and he won and he had the first u.s. bank. jefferson got rid of it. this has been going on for a long time but our central bank, the federal verve, was started in 1913. they created -- they're created by congress and the government but they're secret and private in the sense that nobody really

controls them. so right now for instance, the federal reserve in the banking crisis and financial crisis we had in 2008 and 2009, the federal reserve was able to create out of thin air $15 trillion and passed it out around the world to central banks and corporations and foreign governments. it is all secret. now we're getting more exposure. we work real hard on getting the audit, but it is their power to create money out of thin air and what they do is they lower interest rates lower than they should be, sends bad information so it causes financial bubbles. so just putting more money in circulation doesn't cause more prosperity. it causes, say, like prices of houses to go up too high until people discover it and there's a crash. so that business cycle and extremes are caused by the federal reserve. it's one of the biggest issues, but there's a lot of good things on the internet about the central bank and people

should read the writings of murray rothbar who has some very good literature written on the central bank. there's one, what has the government done to our money? a little pamphlet that he's written. it's very important. people on the college campuses , at least the ones that came to our rallies, are very much aware to the detriment the federal reserve has been to us. host: congressman ron paul represents texas' 14th district. there's a story from reuters that says seven states qualify for succession. response from white house. citizens from more than 40 states have filed -- >> "washington journal" live every day at 7:00 a.m. eastern and you can watch this in our video library at c-span.org. the u.s. house is gaveling in momentarily to begin debate on the rule for a bill that would normalize u.s. trade relations

with russia. they'll debate the rule. they'll recess and return later on for any requested votes. now live to the house floor here on c-span. the speaker pro tempore: the house will be in order. the prayer will be offered by the guest chaplain, the reverend dr. allen keernen, office of the united states senate chaplain. the chaplain: please boy your heads in prayer. father god, as it says, i will ex toll the lord at all times, his praise will always be on my lips. my soul will burst in the lord.

let the afflicted hear and rejoice. glorify the lord with me. let us exalt his name together. we depend on you, king of heaven's armies, to reveal to our nation's leaders your plans to prosper our nation and its people. your plans to give us hope and a bright future. inspire every public servant to seek your wisdom and pray for your daily favor. to fall upon our country and our world. and may you, lord, be with those who are in harm's way and their families. this i ask in the name of every name, amen. the speaker pro tempore: the chair has examined the journal of the last day's proceedings and announces to the house his approval thereof. the journal stands approved. the pledge of allegiance will be led by the gentlewoman from illinois, mrs. biggert.

mrs. biggert: please join me in the pledge. i pledge allegiance to the flag of the united states of america and to the republic for which it stands, one nation, under god, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. the speaker pro tempore: the chair lays before the house the following enrolled bill. the clerk: h.r. 2606, an act to authorize the secretary of the interior to allow the construction and operation of natural gasline facilities in the gateway national recreation area and for other purposes. the speaker pro tempore: the chair will entertain up to 15 requests for one-minute speeches on each side of the aisle. for other purposes -- for what purpose does the gentleman from texas seek recognition? mr. poe: to address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, so ordered. mr. poe: mr. speaker, as waves

crashed across the east coast a few weeks ago, taxpayer dollars were still being funneled as foreign aid around the globe. as families watched superstorm sandy wash away their homeland, the livelihoods that i built for many years, over 58 countries were still busy cashing checks from america. meerbling, out of all the countries we give aid to, i understand israel was the only country to send a life boat in the wind and rain and flood to help our victims in america. israel took the initiative to help the victims during this natural disaster. the israel flying aid organization has been giving gas to hospitals, batteries, food and generators to superstorm sandy victims. we've been there for many countries in the world. we send them our money but it's no secret that many of them hate us. they betray us and yet we still write them checks. while the united states needs to re-evaluate giving aid to countries that hate us, thanks should be given to our faithful ally, israel.

and that's the way it is. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. for what purpose does the gentleman from ohio rise? >> i ask unanimous consent -- i ask permission to address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, so ordered. mr. kucinich: american drones in pakistan have killed as many as 3,378 people. drones in yemen have killed as many as 1,952 people. drones in somalia have killed as many as 170 people. we've not declared war on any of these nations, but our weapons have killed innocent civilians in all of them. highly reputable research high-level targets killed as a percentage of total casualties is estimated about 2%. according to the "washington post," the obama administration is working on efforts to institutionalize the practice of targeted killings by unmanned drones abroad. the volume of these killings challenges the morality and the legality of the attacks. we're creating a precedence for other nations who are

developing the same technology. china has unveiled a new drone. the drone program has thus far been conducted with no oversight from congress or any other judicial body. congress has a constitutional responsibility to ensure that programs are being conducted -- that are being conducted in the name of our nation are legal, transparent and accountable. we're holding a briefing tomorrow about this exact matter. the speaker pro tempore: the time of the gentleman has expired. for what purpose does the gentlelady from illinois seek recognition? mrs. biggert: i ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, so ordered. mrs. biggert: today i rise to applaud two hometown heroes. one who saved a woman who nearly drowned on lake michigan. nicholas was enjoying time with his mother on a beach off of the indiana shore when he noticed an empty raft and swimmers in distress. thanks to his quick thinking

and selfless instincts, he was able to rescue helen hernandez, pulling her to safety to a sandbar. i had the privilege of nominating nicholas to the u.s. navy academy, and i was pleased to congratulate him on his recent graduation. today as second lieutenant in the marines, he's already put on full display his commitment and dedication as a u.s. officer. his actions on lake michigan reflect the marine motto of searcher if i, our always -- semper fi, or always faithful. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady's time has expired. for what purpose does the gentleman from florida seek recognition? >> i ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, so ordered. mr. deutch: mr. speaker, in the past 24 hours alone, terrorists in the gaza strip have launched more than 250 rockets into southern israel. that's 250 rockets in one day since hamas began its strikes. imagine 250 rockets raining

down in one day on your community. anywhere in the united states. we could expect our government to act to protect our citizens. israel is acting to protect her citizens. israel has the right to protect her citizens from terrorist attacks. in the early hours of this morning, three israeli civilians died when a rocket from gaza struck the top floor of an apartment building. later in the day, a rocket hit near tel aviv. we mourn the loss of life at the hands of hamas terrorists. we will not waiver for israel to defend herself against these and other attacks. the right of any nation to defend its citizens can never be called into question. mr. speaker, at this challenging time for our great ally, the united states stands with israel. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. for what purpose does the gentleman from illinois seek recognition? >> i ask unanimous consent to

address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, so ordered. mr. dold: thank you, mr. speaker. i rise today to address the recent events in the middle east. our ally israel, like every nation, must have the right to defend itself and its citizens against ongoing acts of terror. now we know that the international community frequently looks for opportunities to delegitimize israel's actions, which is why it is essential that we here in the united states of america loudly and publicly express our support for israel's right to defend herself in the face of hamas' terror. hamas is responsible for over 800 rocket attacks on israel in 2012. with over 250 rockets indiscriminantly fired on israel's citizens in the past five days alone. because of this escalation, one million men, women and children in southern israel will be forced to live under the threat of attacks and must now know where the nearest rocket shelter is located. as i speak, thousands of

israelies are sleeping in bomb shelters out of fear for their lives and the lives of their children. mr. speaker, no nation would sit back and tolerate its population living under such threatening conditions. certainly we here in the united states would not. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the time of the gentleman has expired. for what purpose does the gentleman from california seek recognition? >> i ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute and to revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, so ordered. mr. costa: mr. speaker, it's time to get to work. when congress recessed for the election, we left much undone, including the farm bill, which is critical to the economy of my district and to our country. just this weekend, one wrote, there are some in congress who suggest delaying the farm bill until after new members begin serving in january. that's the easy way out, but it does not serve the interests of our nation's farmers. it also doesn't serve the families in need and children who depend upon the nutrition

programs in the farm bill. it's time to get back to representing the interests of our constituents, not partisan politics. dairy men are having a tough time in california, and our farmers need certainty and only a five-year farm bill can provide that. both versions of the farm bill also save billions of dollars. we have an agreement, we have bipartisan agreement in this bill. we need to pass this bill so that we can go to the conference committee to resolve the differences. i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. for what purpose does the gentleman from kansas seek recognition? >> i seek unanimous consent to address the house for one minute and to revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, so ordered. >> mr. speaker, the american people are breathing a cautious sigh of relief now that the long election season is finally over. the house and senate are both in session and the american people are watching. we have much work to do and not much time to do it. our economy is still struggling. to get america back on track we

must work together, democrats and republicans, to find solutions to our economic challenges. we all know it's not until small businesses begin growing and creating jobs that our economy will recover. the key to our future lies in new startups, innovators and entrepreneurs. mr. yoder: working together in a bipartisan way, we can avoid the fiscal cliff, provide certainty to these small businesses, remove barriers of success and help rebuild the prosperity of the american people. last week our constituents spoke and the mandate they gave us was a mandate to work together. we must listen to them and arrive at bipartisan solutions to the very serious issues facing our country. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. for what purpose does the gentleman from tennessee seek recognition? mr. cohen: to address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentleman is recognized for one minute. mr. cohen: thank you, mr. speaker. we are indeed back here in a lame-duck session with the most important issue facing us is a deadline on taxes and revenue. by previous action we have to

act or certain conditions will be created that will cause us to lose jobs and hurt our economy and raise taxes on everybody. the president, the senate, the democrats in the house are all in agreement that 98% of the country needs tax relief that has been given through the bush tax cuts and they should be extended. i think everybody agrees we do not need to make draconian cuts to services for people, social security or medicare or defense. the only issue is my colleagues on the other side of the house, the republicans, who seem to give tax relief to the upper %. that's what divides this nation and this congress right now. -- the upper 2%. that's twa divides this nation and this congress right now. tax cuts on the upper 2%. i ask that speaker boehner will work with president obama into resolving this situation. thank you, mr. speaker. and i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. for what purpose does the gentleman from pennsylvania seek recognition? >> request unanimous consent to address the house for one

minute and to revise and extend. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, so ordered. thompson thompson -- mr. thompson: mr. speaker, i rise to recognize mr. dave white, chief of the natural resource conservation service at the u.s. department of agriculture. after a career with nrcs that spanned nearly four decades, this week he announced his plans to retire. chief white has spent his career working toward improving the land management policies and practices. over the years, dave has been an indispensible resource of experience and knowledge, from helping to craft the 2008 farm bill conservation title to his leadership in implementing these programs at the nrcs. dave's work has helped the nation achieve the shared objectives for sustaining agriculture and the natural resources upon which we all depend. one area in particular is voluntary and incentive base programs chief white has leveraged resources to maximize limited resources. in my home state of pennsylvania, these efforts are helping to improve the health of the chesapeake bay watershed.

we're also keeping farms profitable and ensuring these farms remain in agriculture over the long term. i want to thank dave white for his dedicated service. best of luck in your retirement, chief, and i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. for what purpose does the gentleman from massachusetts seek recognition? >> i ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute and to revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, so ordered. >> mr. speaker, on october 2, while congress was campaigning, the pentagon registered the 2,000th fatality in afghanistan, the longest war in american history. mr. mcgovern: it is comparative we all remember the terrible human price that's been paid -- is being paid and will continue to be paid by our troops in afghanistan and their families. this year they have been 50 so-called blue on green killings by afghan troops they were training. they kill themselves at a rate of one out of every 80 minutes. more active duty uths military personnel have died by suicide since the war in afghanistan began than have died fighting there.

nearly 18,000 have been wounded in afghanistan alone. let us bring them all home. let us provide our veterans and active military the care and benefits that they have so bravely earned. let's end the war in afghanistan now. i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. for what purpose does the gentlelady from california seek recognition? >> to address the house for one minute and to revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, so ordered. mrs. capps: mr. speaker, we have a few short weeks left in the 112th congress, but our work here is far from done. sadly, partisan games and gridlock have made this congress one of the least productive in history. but with the elections finally behind us, i hope we will put aside our differences and get back to work, and that means passing a bipartisan farm bill to support our farmers and ranchers. it means creating jobs in a growing wind industry and reduce electricity bills for consumers. it means passing the violence against women act to protect women from abuse. and it means extending tax cuts for middle class families and small businesses now and passing

a balanced plan to avert sequestration. we must address these critical issues and the only way to do that is by coming together and doing what's right for the american people. mr. speaker, the election is over. it's time to get back to work. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady's time has expired. for what purpose does the gentlelady from hawaii seek recognition? >> request unanimous consent to address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, so ordered. ms. hanabusa: thank you, mr. speaker. mr. speaker, the election is over for this cycle and it is time to do the people's work. the president is re-elected and he is our president for the next four years. our constituents are tired and upset with our dysfunction. they can't begin to comprehend how we've allowed the fiscal cliff to happen. many of them don't even understand what the fiscal cliff is about. all they know is that things like unemployment can rise to 9.1% unless we act. it is time to put the elections behind us and work together.

mr. speaker, we must focus on the people. especially the constituents of our colleagues who are suffering from the aftermath of hurricane sandy. we have got to work together and do the people's work. isn't that what we've been sent here to do? mr. speaker, let's get the people's work done. i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady's time has expired. for what purpose does the gentlelady from california seek recognition? >> i ask permission to address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, so ordered. >> mr. speaker, last tuesday our president said something that i think this congress needs to hear. the people of our districts sent us here to focus on their jobs, not our own. we're racing toward a serious deadline, toward higher taxes on struggling families and slashed investments in things like food for mothers and infants.

education and our infrastructure. we're dragging people's jobs toward the brink and playing chicken with workers and entrepreneurs' livelihoods. i know i'm not the only one here who spent time with the families that missing this deadline will hurt. i know i'm not the only one who's visited the businesses that would collapse if this happens. the people in our districts need to us come together. they're counting on us to do the right thing. to leave our partisanship at the ballot box. ms. hahn: and to get to work. so i say to all my friends and colleagues, democrats and republicans, let's get this thing done. i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the time of the gentlelady has expired. for what purpose does the gentleman from texas seek recognition? >> to address the house for one minute, to revise and extend. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, so ordered. mr. green: thank you, mr. speaker. mr. speaker, we hear a lot of talk about the consequences of the fiscal cliff on the wealthy. the well off, the well healed and the well to do. we don't hear a lot of talk about how it will impact the least, the last and the lost. permit me today to share just a bit of information.

rental assistance for the poor would fall by $2.3 billion. nutrition programs for women, infanlts and children would lose -- infants and children would lose $543 million. those who provide services to persons who get medicare, doctors, would lose about $4 billion. mr. speaker, if we are to have an act of congress we have to have a congress willing to act. it is time for us to act, to protect the least, the last and the lost as well as others. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. for what purpose does the gentleman from georgia seek recognition? without objection, so ordered. mr. johnson: mr. speaker, i rise to urge congress to deal with the fiscal cliff. the majority of americans cass their ballots in support of the -- cast their ballots in support of the president and a bald

solution to our fiscal challenges, that protects the middle class by asking everyone to pay their fair share. our job is to act. we should extend the middle class tax cuts now while we work on a long-term solution. we must work together because failure would have dire consequences for middle class jobs, the military and crucial programs that help the middle class and the poor. with that, mr. speaker, i will yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. for what purpose does the gentlelady from the virgin islands seek recognition? mrs. christensen: to address the house for one minute, mr. speaker, and revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, so ordered. mrs. christensen: thank you, mr. speaker. the election is over. the people of this country have spoken and said loudly and clearly that they want us to work together, to create jobs and fix our economy. i agree with the economists who say that the threat of a fiscal cliff like the need to immediately reduce the deficit is being overblown and it's done like the debt ceiling debacle, to create a do or die situation

where the hope is that democrats would agree to programs that would lose jobs. we cannot agree to it. we're being asked to cut the deficit by $4 trillion over 10 years, cuts and caps are projected to cut that deficit by $1.7 trillion. that leaves $2.3 trillion. if we allow the growth in the economy to continue, even at present slow pace, that can help reduce the need for those level of cuts even more. the poor and the middle class are already doing their part through the cuts that are already in place. now it's time for everyone else to do theirs. the rest of the deficit reduction must come primarily from eliminating tax cuts for the wealthy who have continued to do very well during this recession while everyone else suffered. this congress can avoid taking us to a fiscal cliff and avoid sequestration by working together in the balanced way that the american people have asked us to. thank you. the speaker pro tempore: the time of the gentlelady has expired. for what purpose does the gentleman from california seek

recognition? >> i ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute, revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. dreier: mr. speaker, i rise today to say to ours that it's very gratifying that in just -- our colleagues to say that it's very gratifying that in just a few minutes we will take up an issue. it's an issue that's going to be addressed in a bipartisan way. i'm very happy to see my friend from worcester here who has joined with me in doing a dear colleague in support of passage of permanent normal trade relations for russia and moldova. and our commitment to economic growth and human rights is one which has led us to this point, mr. speaker, and i think that the idea, with the mandate from the election, was for us to resolve issues and work together and we're going to have a chance to do that. and so as i get ready to call up the rule in just a moment, mr. speaker, i want to say to my colleagues, that this is a great day for us to take on the very, very serious challenges and i

believe that the success that we're going to have with the bipartisanship that is going to be demonstrated on this issue should lay the groundwork for the work of the rest of this congress and i hope very much for the next congress as well. with that i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. for what purpose does the gentlelady from california seek recognition? without objection, so ordered. >> thank you, mr. speaker. let me also thank mr. israel, mr. connolly and mr. tonko and all of the members of the sustainable energy and environment coalition for being such strong advocates for a responsible and sustainable energy future. ms. lee: today i rise to speak in favor of the wind production tax credit and urge my colleagues to support its extension. wind power and other sources of renewable energy are a vital and central part of a sustainable energy future and they can be harvested right here in america. in my own district, for example, i am very proud to say that there are currently six companies operating wind power plants. these power plants not only

generate energy, but also jobs and manufacturing jobs right here at home. i urge this congress to support the extension here because it will put people to work in good-paying jobs, help rebuild our manufacturing base and help us achieve energy independence. thank you and i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady's time has expired. for what purpose does the gentleman from california seek recognition? mr. dreier: mr. speaker, i will keep my promise by saying that on the direction of the committee on rules, i call up house resolution 808 and ask for its immediate consideration. the speaker pro tempore: the clerk will report the resolution. the clerk: house calendar number 164, house resolution 808. resolved that upon adoption of this resolution it shall be in order to consider in the house the bill h.r. 6156, to authorize the extension of nondiscriminatory treatment, normal trade relations treatment to products of the russian federation and moldova and to require reports on the

compliance of the russian federation with its obligations as a member of the world trade organization and for other purposes. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from california is recognized for one hour. the clerk: all points of order against consideration -- the speaker pro tempore: the clerk will continue to read. the clerk: all points of order against consideration of the bill are waived. an amendment in the nature of a substitute consisting of the text of the rules committee print, 112-33, shall be considered as adopted. the bill as amended should shal be considered as read. all points of order against provisions in the bill as amended are waived. the previous question shall be considered as ordered on the bill as amended on any further amendment thereto to final passage without intervening motion except, one, 90 minutes of debate with 60 minutes equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking minority member of the committee on ways and means, and 30 minutes equally divided and controlled by the chair and running backing minority member of ranking affairs. and, two, one motion to recommit with or without instructions. section 2, on any legislative

day during the period from november 19, 2012, through november 23, 2012, a, the journal of the proceedings of the previous day shall be considered as approved. b, the chair may at any time declare the house adjourned to meet at a date and time within the limits of clause 4, section 5, article 1 of the constitution, to be announced by the chair and declaring the adjournment. and, c, bills and resolutions shall be numbered, listed in the congressional record, and when printed shall be bear the date of introduction. may be referred by the speaker at a later time. section 3, the speaker may appoint members to perform the duties of the chair for the duration of the period addressed by section 2 of this resolution as though under clause 8-a of rule 1. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from california is now recognized for one hour. mr. dreier: thank you very much, mr. speaker. let me say how great it is to see you in the chair and i wish you well.

mr. speaker, for the purposes of debate only i yield the customary 30 minutes to my very good friend from worcester, pending which i yield myself such time as i might consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. dreier: and i ask unanimous consent to revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, so ordered. mr. dreier: and already said that all time will be yielded for debate purposes only. mr. speaker, let me say that as i just mentioned in my one-minute, it's very gratifying that as we look at this election we have many people who have used the term mandate to describe what it is that they have gotten. the president says he has a mandate to increase taxes. some republicans say that we have a mandate to not increase taxes. and lots of people throw this word mandate around. and i believe that the mandate is for us to focus on job creation and economic growth and while we still embrace the madisonian vision of a clash of ideas is a very important notion put forward by the author of the

u.s. constitution, at the end of the day, it's important for us to do something and i think that the mandate from the election is that the american people want us to do everything that we can to create jobs, get the economy growing and deal with many of the societal challenges that we face. and, mr. speaker, that's why i say it's very gratifying that the first item out of the chute after the election is something that we're going to be able to do in a bipartisan way. not that it hasn't been controversial. and i will admit, mr. speaker, that there is controversy that surrounds this issue and i'm going to talk about it. but i will say that it's great that we'll be able to do something. with democrats in the house, republicans in the senate, and in the house, democrats in the senate, republicans in the senate, and the president of the united states on the same page in support of russia's succession to the w.t.o. and the opportunity for the united

states of america, our workers, to have access to 142 million consumers in that country. so, mr. speaker, on august 22 russia became a member of the world trade organization. again, a huge economy. in fact, the last large economy, large economy to actually become a member of the w.t.o. and that's a good thing. it's a good thing because vladimir putin is not a good guy. it's a good thing, mr. speaker, because we are going to not only with the w.t.o., but also with the provisions that have been included in this measure, calling on the united states trade representative, calling on the state department, calling on other entities to focus on things like intellectual property violations,

negotiations, sanitary and agreements, the information technology agreement, the government procurement agreement. there are a wide range of provisions in here that will force russia to live with a structure that it does not have today and will not have until we take this very important action. one of the reasons i have been such a strong proponent of this action has to do with a name and it's not a name we are going to be talking about a minute. the name is mikheil kordicofsky. he was jailed, seven years additional extension of his crime for so-called tax evasion. i mention those two words explaining why i'm here because

i met mr. khodorkovsky, he was a critic of vladimir putin. he's incarcerated today for being a critical of being vladimir putin. that's why he's really in prison. the reason i'm standing here and a proponent of the action we are about to take, after i met with him, he sat in my office right up here in the rules committee. and in that meeting that i had with him, mr. khodorkovsky, great philanthropist, he said, i'm concerned about my safety and well-being. i think there might be action taken against me. mr. speaker, i'm embarrassed to say my reaction was to laugh at him. i said there's no way that a man of your stature, doing the

things you've been doing in russia will face anything other than broad-based support. mr. speaker, i was wrong. the human rights violations which have taken place against mikheil -- mikhail khordorkovsky is why we're pushing for normal trade relations, to force russia something they may not want to do and that is deal with a rules-based trading system. and also sergei magnitsky, a young lawyer, a young lawyer who was simply raising questions, a so-called whistleblower, a whistleblower who was beaten to death through years ago tomorrow. tomorrow marks the third anniversary of sergei magnitsky's death, and it is outrageous, it is outrageous,

mr. speaker, that this kind of action in this 21st century still exists in a country that claims to be a democracy. it is horrendous and it is unacceptable. and that's why i believe, coupling the permanent normal trade relations for russia and muldova along with the magnitsky language -- and i want to congratulate our colleagues, ben cardin and jon kyl and i know mr. mcgovern has been pushing for this, i strongly support the effort that we have had that will ensure that those who are responsible for sergei magnitsky's tragic, brutal beating, which led to his death three years ago tomorrow, will be followed and be brought to justice. so, mr. speaker, this is a great bipartisan effort.

it's one that i think will enamor to the people of russia and to the people of the united states. i'd like to say, remember, we're not giving up a thing. we are not lowering a single tariff. there's not a single sacrifice being made here in the united states of america. what we're doing is we're breaking down the barriers there. last year we exported $11 billion, $11 billion to russia. the projection is that by 2017 our exports will be $22 billion, twice, and there are a number that thinks it will go beyond that. so, mr. speaker, let me just say that this is a win-win all the way around. it's a win for the caw of human rights -- for the cause of human rights. it's a win for the cause of, democrats and republicans alike, who want to create good american jobs so we can have access to 142 million consumers, and it's a win for the people of russia who

deserve better than they've gotten and through the u.s. access to that market will have an opportunity, mr. speaker, an opportunity to see their standard of life and quality of life improved, because i believe passionately in the interdependence of economic and political liberalization. this succession of the w.t.o. will enhance economic liberalization and it will create an opportunity. i hope and pray for the kind of political reform that is desperately needed. with that i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from california reserves his time. the gentleman from massachusetts. mr. mcgovern: thank you, mr. speaker. i yield myself such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. mcgovern: mr. speaker, i want to thank the gentleman from california, the honorable chairman of the rules committee, for yielding me the customary 30 minutes. i want to thank him for his eloquent statement. i want to thank him for bringing this to the floor. as he mentioned he and i co-authored a dear colleague in support of the underlying legislation, and it was a pleasure to work with him on

this important bill. i know there will be other opportunities to say this before he departs, but i want to thank him for his service to this house of representatives, which i know he loves very deeply. and i want to thank him for his service to our country. mr. speaker, h.r. 6156 joins together two pieces of legislation that deals with trade and human rights in the russia federation. the distinguished chairman has provided a clear description of this bill that grant permanent normal trade relations to the nations of muldova and the russian federation. it is fairly straightforward. simply put, after more than 18 years of negotiations, russia joined the world trade organization in august. that membership will require russia for the first time to play by the same rules of trade as the united states and virtually every other nation in the world. but under w.t.o. rules, the united states cannot take advantage of -- take advantage of russia's w.t.o. membership

unless and until congress grants russia permanent normal trade relations, replacing the 1974 special bilateral agreement with russia, known as the jackson-vanik amendment. the united states is not required to change any u.s. law as a result of russia's w.t.o. membership other than this change to the 1974 trade law. this is in contrast to bilateral free trade agreements where the united states is required to provide duty-free treatment. if that were all there was to h.r. 6156, it would pass or fail along familiar lines of trade-related legislation. but mr. speaker, h.r. 6156 will become known as a landmark piece of trade legislation, not because it grants pmtr for russia and muldova, but it includes title 4, the sergei magnitsky rule of law accountability act of 2012. let me share with my colleagues the life and death of sergei magnitsky and whose honor this

section of the bill is named. after exposing the largest tax fraud in russian history, tax lawyer sergei magnitsky was wrongly arrested and tortured in a russian prison. six months later he became ill. he was denied medical attention. on november 16, 2009, three years ago tomorrow, his condition became critical. three years -- instead of being treated in a hospital, he was taken to an isolation cell, chained to a bed and beaten by eight prison guards for one hour and 18 minutes which resulted in his death. sergei magnitsky was 37 years old. he left behind a wife and two children. those responsible for his abuse and murder have yet to be punished, and sadly he is not alone. his story is emblem attic of corruption, -- emblematic of corruption, human rights abuses and corruption in russia. since the death of sergei

magnitsky, the corruption inside the russian federation has continued to deteriorate. russian's parliamentary elections last december was marked by mass protest over electoral fraud. since vladimir putin was re-elected president in may of 2012, his government has taken a harsh and confrontational approach to ongoing protests, cracking down on the russian people's growing discontent with corruption and creeping authoritarianism. russian authorities have used excessive force to break up peaceful rallies. russian civil society has also been a target of increasing repression. beginning in june and with astonishing speed, the russian douma passed a series of draconian laws that restrict freedom of expression, freedom of association and freedom of assembly. many observers feel -- many observers fear that these laws will be used as a political weapon to stifle criticism of

the government. they make it harder for russian civil society to operate effectively and create a climate of fear and self- censorship. civil society sense of isolation is only compounded by the russian government's recent decision to expel organizations, like usaid from the country. in addition, journalists and human rights activists continue to face grave dangers in pursuing their work. just last month, tanya with the moscow office on human rights watch, received a series of threats to herself and her unborn child. most like in connection to her efforts to expose impunity for human rights abuses. her experience is not unique. while russian authorities have tried to silence critics, n.g.o.'s and independent media, the world is still awaiting justice for many violent attacks on dissidents and journalists. and i'd like to note for my colleagues today at 2:00 p.m., the tom lantos human rights commission will be holding a hearing on human rights and the

russian federation, and tanya will be one of the witnesses. in this context, the story of sergei magnitsky remains especially important. at a time when the human rights swace in the country is going from bad to worse, it is all the more important to old russian human rights violators accountable. mr. speaker, the sergei magnitsky rule of law accountability act, which is title 4 of h.r. 6156, as reported by the rules committee, places an asset freeze and visa ban on those individuals responsible for sergei magnitsky's torture and death as well as on russian officials engaged in corruption and gross human -- gross violations of human rights. this is beyond just sergei magnitsky. these measures provide a degree of accountability and reinforce the administration's tool kit to respond to crimes by individual government officials. passage of magnitsky act sends a clear message to the russian people that we support their fundamental human rights. importantly, it also sends a

strong message to those russian officials who support the rule of law and who reject corruption and human rights abuses. it lets them know that their efforts and their achievements are valued by the united states and the international community. only individuals within the russian government who abuse their office and engage in corruption and human rights crimes will find their assets and visas under scrutiny and subject to u.s. sanction. so let me be clear, mr. speaker, i would not be supporting pmtr for the russian federation if it did not include title 4, the sergei magnitsky rule of law accountability act. let me close by thanking not only the gentleman from california, the distinguished chairman of the rules committee, but i want to thank the republican leadership, the speaker of the house, the minority leader, the democratic leadership, minority leader and our minority whip as well as the chairwoman of the foreign affairs committee and the ranking member of the foreign affairs committee for working together to come up with a bill

here that -- an agreement here that i think deserves bipartisan support. so i urge all my colleagues to support the magnitsky act by voting for the underlying legislation, h.r. 6156, and i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves the balance of his time. the gentleman from california. mr. dreier: mr. speaker, let me again express my appreciation to my good friend from worcester and it's been a great honor and privilege to work in a bipartisan way with him on this as i've been privileged to work with many democrats in this house on many different bipartisan issues over the years. i'm getting ready to leave this place, mr. speaker. i'll be in january, as you will, moving on to another life for me it's after nearly 3 1/2 decades. and i got to say to have this -- we have lots of work ahead in the next four weeks to have this trade issue is gratifying for me. as i mentioned i'm leaving, i'm very pleased to for his first speech since being named chairman of the rules committee for the next congress, i'm very

happy to yield such time as he may consume to the very thoughtful, dedicated and hardworking gentleman from dallas, mr. sessions. let me say, mr. speaker, that there are lots of hard workers in this house. and there are -- we all learn as kids there's a differentiation between a workhorse and a show horse. i got to tell you, mr. speaker, and you know this very well, there is no democrat or republican in the united states house of representatives who works any harder, any harder than pete sessions, and i'm very pleased, mr. speaker, that he's going to be succeeding me as chairman of the house rules committee and i of course yield to him such time as he may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from texas is recognized for such time as he may consume. mr. sessions: mr. speaker, thank you very much. and to my dear and distinguished friend, the gentleman, the young chairman of the rules committee, david dreier, thank you very much. it is david's leadership, not just in the rules committee, but i believe to all of us here in the house of representatives

that david has let us to be a more open, thoughtful body, person who used his time and position, power of the rules committee to -- in the committee that's upstairs to speak with all the members of this body about their ideas that they represent and to make this a more open body. this institution is better because of david dreier. i'm -- i am very aware of what lies ahead for me, but, david, you have done a great job. thank you. thank you very much. i rise today to support what chairman dreier and this man, mr. mcgovern have been speaking of and that is the rule and the underlying legislation. there are over 23 million americans right now looking for work that are either over or underemployed in our country, mr. speaker. so today is a jobs bill. another jobs bill that is

important and permanent, normalized trade relations with russia and moldova. it will provide that much needed boost. just a little bit, but a boost to the direction of adding jobs and making sure that the jobs we have here in our country, to provide goods and services to another country, on an equal basis, is important. this pntr vote will mean that we're expected to double exports to russia in just five years and to help create and strengthen jobs in this country while providing russia with a great product at the right price. whether it's in manufacturing, agriculture or the service industry. i believe this is an important bill for us to move on a bipartisan basis. russia's the ninth largest economy and has a population of about 142 million people. it has a large and growing middle class and russia holds outstanding potential for the

united states, not just in the business interest, but also for goods and services, to make the lives of the russian people even better. my home state of texas is the top exporter to russia among u.s. states. and texas imports to russia are growing faster than its exports to the rest of the world. specifically texas exported $1,6 00,000,000 of goods to russia in 2011. we in texas value this relationship. the jobs, the exporting and the ability to have better products and services in russia with the russian people making those decisions to buy these products and services. this legislation today will only help us build on that success. growing, not just more jobs, but really the american economy. so, i will say this on behalf of all of us. this is an important bill. we needed to work together. we need leadership of this body, all the members, as well as the

senate and the president to make this happen. i will yield to the gentleman. mr. dreier: i thank my friend for yielding. as i was sitting here listening to the very thoughtful remarks of my successor as chairman of the house rules committee, i was reminded -- it reminded me of what really got him onto the rules committee and got him engaged with me and interestingly enough, mr. speaker, it was this issue. it was the issue of breaking down barriers to allow for the free flow of goods and services and capital. when he first came to this body, mr. speaker, we were in the midst of our battle on china's accession to the world trade organization and establishing pntr at that juncture which has been a great thing. not that it's been problem-free. i acknowledge that. but it's been a great thing, to be able to take the steps that we have. and it was pete sessions, mr. speaker, who came to me and said, i want to help you with

this. and i actually gave him an assignment. it was to talk to a half dozen members about how important this was. mr. speaker, in less than an hour he came back to me, having done the job right then and that's why i described him as the person -- as i say, no one in this -- there's a lot of hardworking people here, there are a lot of hardworking people on both sides of the aisle, but no one has been more diligent and worked harder than my friend, pete sessions. and i thank my friend for yielding. mr. sessions: thank you. reclaiming my time. this is the kind of energy and leadership that david dreier expects from members as he gives them, not just tasks of opportunities, the young chairman gave me that opportunity and i took full advantage of it. as i recall we were 10-10, all of them voted for it also. so i didn't just make up all of them. mr. speaker, this is an important bill we're doing today. this is worthy of our time and i'm delighted that we're joined by owfrerd -- by our friends. i yield back the balance of my

time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. the gentleman from massachusetts. govern govern yielding myself such -- mr. mcgovern: i yield myself such time as i may consume. i thank the gentleman from texas for his statement and to publicly congratulate him on his new appointment. i look forward to working with him. so congratulations. and, mr. speaker, i just want to again point out, you know, trade bills oftentimes are very controversial. and there's often a resistance to attach any additional language, whether it be human rights language or labor rights language, to trade bills. but in this case, again, working in a bipartisan way, i think the attachment of the sergei magnitsky bill to this trade bill is probably the most significant piece of human rights legislation attached to any trade bill since i've been here in congress. this is a bill deal. this sends a message -- big deal. this send as message to human rights violators in russia, those who are guilty of

corruption, that there's a consequence. and even if that consequence is not bringing you to justice within russia, there are -- the united states and we will be joined hopefully by our allies, will make sure that there are visa been as that are put in place and -- bans that are put in place and assets are frozen. that there's a consequence. and our hope is that this language will prop up those in russia who want to push for reform, who believe in accountability and believe in tackling issues like impunity. mr. speaker, at this time i'd like to yield four minutes to the gentleman from michigan, mr. levin, who is the ranking member of the ways and means committee, who is incredibly helpful to me in making sure that these two pieces of legislation were brought together and i think in a way that makes it possible for me to be able to support this bill. mr. levin. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from michigan is recognized for four minutes.

without objection. mr. levin: first, if i might, let me congratulate mr. dreier on your service and many years you've believed in this institution. and that's been -- mr. dreier: you're my junior colleague, when you said many services. you're my junior colleague by one term. i thank my colleague for yielding. mr. levin: you believe in this institution and i think that's been reflected. so let me just say a few words, we'll debate it perhaps longer tomorrow. why this trade bill should be passed. i think we need to take each trade bill on its own merits. and when you look at the need to move here today to grant pntr, i think the answer is we clearly should. first of all, russia is now in the b.t.o. -- w.t.o. and it has gone in with certain requirements.

for example, no export subsidies are allowed. that's a change and that's beneficial to those of us who want to trade with them. so they don't rig the deck against us and for them. and there are major reductions in tariffless. also, now that they're in the w.t.o., there is a dispute settlement system and so when they violate the requirements, there's a dispute settlement system that can be enforced. and if we're not -- if we don't grant pntr, we can't access that dispute settlement system. also, it's important that there be strong enforcement and a number of my colleagues put forth some legislation that proposed that we beef up the enforcement provisions within

this bill. and that's been done. our staff on the democratic staff, on the democratic side, worked with the senate and the essence of those provisions are now in this bill. so that's another reason to vote for it, because strong enforcement is critical to good trade legislation. also i would urge everybody to look at what are the exports from this country and the imports from russia. and when luke at those it's a good reason for us to vote for this legislation -- and when you look at those it's a good reason for us to vote for this legislation. because the top three exports from the u.s. are machinery, motor vehicles and aircraft. made in america by american

workers. and so in a sense this is a make it in america piece of legislation. while the imports from russia -- the dominant one is in petroleum, in oil, and in that sense they're not directly commeeting -- competing with our workers. so we have in terms of what flows an advantage being a full partner. but let me say one other thing because i think those of you who have found this, no, i don't believe that trade legislation is only about flow of goods. it also has to be embedded in the structure to make sure that there are benefits for our companies and for our workers. and that there's a structure to try to make sure there's a rule

of law. because if there isn't a rule of law in another country, it is not beneficial for their citizens or for our companies. and so here i wanted to pay attention to the magnitsky legislation. because no one should think that it's easy to do business in any country where there isn't a rule of law. and it isn't easy to do business and we should hesitate to simply, blindly do business with a country which really imposes restrictions on the rights of their citizens. and that's what mr. mcgovern has done and what mr. carter and others have done and there's been bipartisan cooperation on this point. strong bipartisan cooperation, to place in this bill the magnitsky legislation that send

as clear signal to the russian government and to everybody in russia, that we care about the rights of the citizens there. and as we do business we care about the rights of others. and that's the strength of this legislation, in addition to opening their markets for goods made in america. can i have an additional minute? the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for one minute. mr. levin: so i really urge that everybody look at this legislation on its own merits. whatever the feelings are about other trade agreements, we need to take each of them on their own, the pluses and the minuses, and in this case i think, especially now that russia's in the w.t.o., it works so much to our advantage in terms of the

economy here, in terms of jobs here, in terms of our businesses and our workers and also i think we can vote for this legislation , if i might say so, with good conscience. and, mr. mcgovern, you have led, it's a tribute to your devotion to the human rights of people as we advance trade. not only in this legislation but in other legislation. i think it's also a recognition of our ability to work together. so i urge passage of the rule and tomorrow we'll speak together to urge passage of the legislation. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. the gentleman from california. mr. dreier: mr. speaker, i want to thank my friend, mr. levin, for his very thoughtful comments and to say i was very pleased to join with mr. mcgovern, as mr.

mcgovern has mentioned and as did i earlier, a dear colleague as we tackle this important challenge of human rights. and i happen to believe very fervently that economic liberalization is a key part of ensuring the ability for human rights to be recognized and that's why i think this legislation is very, very complimentary in addressing not just job creation, economic growth, improving the quality of life for people, but i believe both aspects, the magnitsky aspect and the permanent normal trade relations together work tone chance the human rights situation -- work to ensure the human rights situation that is as devastating as it is. i know i've talked about other members and i'd like to say that for nearly a decade and a half i've been very privileged to work on a wide range of issues, but one of the most important has been issue the -- has been the issue of trade liberalization with my friend from illinois and she's going to be leaving this institution, as you, mr. speaker, are, and as i will as we